| Devotion to Our Lady |
|
CATHOLIC FAMILY RELATED PAGES
Click on any link below
| Catholic Families | Encyclical on Marriage (Pope Leo XIII) | Encyclical on Marriage (Pope Pius XI) |
Click on any link below
| Catholic Families | Encyclical on Marriage (Pope Leo XIII) | Encyclical on Marriage (Pope Pius XI) |
The family that prays together, stays together! The family that merely plays together, fails together!
Are you praying more or playing more these days?
Are you praying more or playing more these days?
Article 1
What is a Catholic Family? Or What Should it Be?
What is a Catholic Family? Or What Should it Be?
Are You a Brick in the Wall, or Are You Slowly Crumbling?
The Catholic Family is the base unit or “building-brick” in the Catholic Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ. The attack on Catholicism, in general, inevitably translates into an attack on Catholic Families in particular. We all know the saying: “With each brick you take out of the wall, the wall becomes weaker and weaker.” How true is this today for the “bricks” of Catholic Families. With each “brick” that is loosened and removed―a person within the family, or a family within the Church―there is an increased weakening in the family or the Church. There have been many things written and said on family life by the Magisterium of the Church, and also by private theologians, family experts, doctors, psychologists and even parents and children themselves. Yet, as the Catholic Family continues to weaken, so too the teaching on the Family weakens and is “watered-down” and “mixed” with secular and non-Catholic teaching. The result is that we are no longer getting the strong medicine that we need to keep Catholic Families truly healthy and truly Catholic.
Sister Lucia Warns of Attack on Families
Sister Lucia of Fatima warned that the devil would launch a massive attack upon the Family. He knows that the Catholic Family is the basic building-block of the Church. Since Sister Lucia spoke of this, we can, in retrospect, see the tragic collapse of Catholic Families throughout the world—they might still be families, but they are less and less Catholic Families. This has reached such dangerous levels, that even the modern Catholic Church and some of few remaining somewhat ‘Conservative’ and/or ‘Conservative-Liberals’ are trying to make a “last-ditch-stand” against the erosion of the Catholic Family.
Modern Church Leaders Start to Admit the Problem! Too Little Too Late?
Last year (March, 2017), the Vatican tried to address the problem. Here is the report by the National Catholic Register, in an article entitled: “Vatican Official Warns: The Family Is Under Attack!” The article goes on to say [the subtitles and comments in parentheses have been added by devotiontoourlady.com]:
Now or Never!
Msgr. Anthony Figueiredo warns that there is a brief window of opportunity, and that if Christians don’t respond to what is happening in the world today, it may be too late to effect change. There is an attack on family life; and the only way back is through prayer. That’s the message from Msgr. Anthony J. Figueiredo, a full-time Consultant to the newly established Vatican Dicastery for Integral Human Development. Monsignor Figueiredo will travel to the United States this week [early March 2017] to speak at the 20th Annual Holy Trinity Apostolate Lenten Symposium in Michigan. He talked to the Register from his offices in Rome.
Families That Pray Together, Stay Together
“You know,” he said, “that the theme for this year’s Conference is ‘The Family That Prays Together... Stays Together.’” [A phrase used by Fr. Patrick Peyton back in the 1950s for his Rosary Crusade—so nothing new here!] And indeed, without prayer, there is a decline in family life. “I was just reading the news here in Italy,” said Msgr. Figueiredo, “and one of the headlines was that in the last year, the birth rate here in Italy fell by 86,000. This represents a historic low in the birth rate – and Italy is a Catholic country!”
Removing ‘Catholic Bricks’ From The Womb
The attack on the family, Msgr. Figueiredo acknowledged, occurs on two fronts: against marriage, and against the child in the womb. We see many permutations of marriage: unions between two persons of the same sex, couples living together without benefit of sacramental marriage, and more. As for the attack on the womb, there is, of course, the prevalence of abortion; but also, many women make the decision not to have children at all – with the result that the children who should be in the pews are not there, and the Church cannot thrive. “Every child born,” said Figueiredo, “is a victory over death, over the evil one.” [Just as every ‘contracepted’ child or aborted child is a brick out of the ‘Catholic Wall’—or could you say “Wall of the Womb”]
But too often, Christians have not responded (or are not responding) to the message of the Church. “If we were really true to our beliefs and our faith, to the teaching that Pope Paul VI gave us in [the encyclical letter] Humanae Vitae,” Msgr. Figueiredo argued, “we would have an answer. What is happening in society today is exactly what Paul VI warned would happen, if we entered into a contraceptive mentality.”
Not Much Time Left Before the Point of No Return
Msgr. Figueiredo is worried that there is a brief window of opportunity, and that if Christians don’t respond to what is happening in the world today, it may be too late to effect change. If the birth rate continues to fall, while large Muslim families continue to have more children, Catholic believers will become just a small minority of the population – with wide-ranging results: Churches will close, parishes will be forced to merge. There will be a decrease in vocations to the priesthood and religious life. “How much more,” Msgr. Figueiredo asked, “do we really need, before we begin having a strong word of Faith? We need to begin again to pray!” [Which, of course, means that Catholics are not praying as they should]. (National Catholic Register, March 3rd, 2017).
The Demon of the Family
In October of 2017, in an interview with the Italian weekly Tempi, the exorcist Fr. César Truqui, a priest who participated in a 2015 course on exorcism held in Rome, stated that there is a demon that specializes in attacking the family. Fr. Truqui warned that everything that is harming the family, including divorce, pleases the devil. He said that there is “a demon who specializes in the attack on the family, also cited in the story of Tobias, called ‘Asmodeus.’” In the Old Testament book, the demon is known to have killed seven of Sarah’s husbands and was chained in the desert by Saint Raphael.
Fr. Truqui said the demon “is present” in many exorcisms, and recalled encountering the demon “in exorcisms by Father Gabriele Amorth and Father Francisco Bamonte, whom I assisted … I remember a young couple, very united, who wanted to get married, however, the woman had to undergo an exorcism to be set free!” During the exorcism “the demon was furious and threatened Fr. Amorth in order to prevent the marriage, otherwise he would kill the young woman. Obviously, it was a threat from the Liar which in fact did not happen.”
In that regard, the priest added that the devil also seeks to attack the family through ideologies and lifestyles, as well as individualistic thinking and the spread of divorce. “They think ‘if I don’t like my husband anymore, I would be better off divorcing’ but they forget about the consequences to the children and society,” he said. “This mentality, that works against the family, pleases the devil.”
Thoughts of a Deceased Priest
Here are a few thoughts from the blog of a Catholic priest (who died in 2016). They show the two-pronged attack that is being waged by the devil and his tools in this world, against the Catholic Family.
“I want to start by listing how the family is attacked today inside the Catholic Church;
● The Pope, many cardinals and bishops who for “pastoral” reasons think that couples living in adultery should be able to receive Holy Communion.
● At the recent Synod on The Family where in the first draft, adultery and sodomy were supported.
● Some cardinals, bishops, religious and priests are living the homosexual life and supporting homosexual unions and marriage in their dioceses and parishes.
● If you speak out against divorce or homosexual unions, then you are disliked and chided by many of the Catholic parishioners. It is very probable that you will also be called “on the carpet” by your pastor or bishop.
● Annulments are encouraged and relatively easy to obtain even when one of the parties believes their marriage is valid.
● There is an almost unanimous usage of birth control by most “practicing” Catholics. This undermines the end of marriage, which is conceiving children.
● Some Catholic hospitals allowing sterilization of men and women in their facilities.
● Catholic doctors prescribing birth control pills, tubal ligation, vasectomy and IUDs.
● Catholic pharmacist filling these prescriptions.
● Strong criticism or jokes directed at large Catholic families by other Catholic family members and people in general.
● Catholic youth having premarital sex and abortions at the same rate as non-Catholics.
● Catholic youth living together without the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony.
● Catholics believe in divorce and divorce at a rate equal to all non-Catholics.
● Increasing experimenting with homosexual sex by Catholic youth.
● Huge epidemic of men and young men, (some women are starting to too), indulging in and have the vice of pornography and masturbation. This terrible vice is brought into the marriage and causes hyper-sexual expectations that have nothing to do with procreation and are plain evil. Pornography causes the man [or woman] to see their spouse as an object for pleasure, rather than a holy spouse.
● Natural family planning is often used as a means of not conceiving children. Many times I have been told of the “let down” of a couple using Natural Family Planning when their “open to life” actually happens and the wife becomes pregnant. Many men sin by not having normal sexual relationships during the time of abstinence. Children are still seen as an option, rather than a blessing from God.
● The general belief today, among Catholics, that morals change and that sex before marriage, or adultery, divorce, homosexual sex and birth control are no longer immoral.
● There is also great pressure put on bishops, religious and priests to go along with the LBGT agenda by practicing homosexual Catholics. These people can make life very miserable, and even make threats on the lives of people, if they do not go along with them. The LBGT are feared like the ISIS are feared. They can put people who oppose them out of business, blackmail them, threaten them and be violent if they get in their way.
● A misunderstanding of what Christian compassion is. The pope, cardinals, religious and priests should be compassionate. But by supporting people in adultery and sodomy, instead of “loving the sinner” and helping him out of sin, they are “loving the sin” out of compassion, and that is wrong. Compassion means not allowing someone you love to be damned forever in the burning flames of Hell.
Here is how other non-Catholic churches influence our Catholic Families [presumably he means through our contact with them; also reading or hearing about them on the various media channels].
● Non-Catholic couples are divorcing and getting remarried in non-Catholic church services. This puts pressure on the Catholics to get divorce and remarried in church whenever there is some problem rather than fixing the problem.
● Ministers say there is nothing wrong with divorce and remarriage, as long as there has been some infidelity involved. This is contrary to the Holy Bible.
● Many non-Catholic churches welcome and marrying homosexual couples.
● Many non-Catholic “bishops”, “priests” and ministers have divorced and remarried or are openly living the homosexual sex life.
● There are also many non-Catholic churches who, as of yet, do not condone homosexual sex or marriage.
● Protestants are told that using birth control is a responsible thing.
As we can see, the family, your family, my family is being attacked in the Catholic Church as well as in the non-Catholic churches as well. But by our prayers, examples, sacrifices and humility we can help hold our family and other families together in God’s love. We are so blessed to know God’s plan for the happiness and love of our own families.”
The Catholic Family is the base unit or “building-brick” in the Catholic Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ. The attack on Catholicism, in general, inevitably translates into an attack on Catholic Families in particular. We all know the saying: “With each brick you take out of the wall, the wall becomes weaker and weaker.” How true is this today for the “bricks” of Catholic Families. With each “brick” that is loosened and removed―a person within the family, or a family within the Church―there is an increased weakening in the family or the Church. There have been many things written and said on family life by the Magisterium of the Church, and also by private theologians, family experts, doctors, psychologists and even parents and children themselves. Yet, as the Catholic Family continues to weaken, so too the teaching on the Family weakens and is “watered-down” and “mixed” with secular and non-Catholic teaching. The result is that we are no longer getting the strong medicine that we need to keep Catholic Families truly healthy and truly Catholic.
Sister Lucia Warns of Attack on Families
Sister Lucia of Fatima warned that the devil would launch a massive attack upon the Family. He knows that the Catholic Family is the basic building-block of the Church. Since Sister Lucia spoke of this, we can, in retrospect, see the tragic collapse of Catholic Families throughout the world—they might still be families, but they are less and less Catholic Families. This has reached such dangerous levels, that even the modern Catholic Church and some of few remaining somewhat ‘Conservative’ and/or ‘Conservative-Liberals’ are trying to make a “last-ditch-stand” against the erosion of the Catholic Family.
Modern Church Leaders Start to Admit the Problem! Too Little Too Late?
Last year (March, 2017), the Vatican tried to address the problem. Here is the report by the National Catholic Register, in an article entitled: “Vatican Official Warns: The Family Is Under Attack!” The article goes on to say [the subtitles and comments in parentheses have been added by devotiontoourlady.com]:
Now or Never!
Msgr. Anthony Figueiredo warns that there is a brief window of opportunity, and that if Christians don’t respond to what is happening in the world today, it may be too late to effect change. There is an attack on family life; and the only way back is through prayer. That’s the message from Msgr. Anthony J. Figueiredo, a full-time Consultant to the newly established Vatican Dicastery for Integral Human Development. Monsignor Figueiredo will travel to the United States this week [early March 2017] to speak at the 20th Annual Holy Trinity Apostolate Lenten Symposium in Michigan. He talked to the Register from his offices in Rome.
Families That Pray Together, Stay Together
“You know,” he said, “that the theme for this year’s Conference is ‘The Family That Prays Together... Stays Together.’” [A phrase used by Fr. Patrick Peyton back in the 1950s for his Rosary Crusade—so nothing new here!] And indeed, without prayer, there is a decline in family life. “I was just reading the news here in Italy,” said Msgr. Figueiredo, “and one of the headlines was that in the last year, the birth rate here in Italy fell by 86,000. This represents a historic low in the birth rate – and Italy is a Catholic country!”
Removing ‘Catholic Bricks’ From The Womb
The attack on the family, Msgr. Figueiredo acknowledged, occurs on two fronts: against marriage, and against the child in the womb. We see many permutations of marriage: unions between two persons of the same sex, couples living together without benefit of sacramental marriage, and more. As for the attack on the womb, there is, of course, the prevalence of abortion; but also, many women make the decision not to have children at all – with the result that the children who should be in the pews are not there, and the Church cannot thrive. “Every child born,” said Figueiredo, “is a victory over death, over the evil one.” [Just as every ‘contracepted’ child or aborted child is a brick out of the ‘Catholic Wall’—or could you say “Wall of the Womb”]
But too often, Christians have not responded (or are not responding) to the message of the Church. “If we were really true to our beliefs and our faith, to the teaching that Pope Paul VI gave us in [the encyclical letter] Humanae Vitae,” Msgr. Figueiredo argued, “we would have an answer. What is happening in society today is exactly what Paul VI warned would happen, if we entered into a contraceptive mentality.”
Not Much Time Left Before the Point of No Return
Msgr. Figueiredo is worried that there is a brief window of opportunity, and that if Christians don’t respond to what is happening in the world today, it may be too late to effect change. If the birth rate continues to fall, while large Muslim families continue to have more children, Catholic believers will become just a small minority of the population – with wide-ranging results: Churches will close, parishes will be forced to merge. There will be a decrease in vocations to the priesthood and religious life. “How much more,” Msgr. Figueiredo asked, “do we really need, before we begin having a strong word of Faith? We need to begin again to pray!” [Which, of course, means that Catholics are not praying as they should]. (National Catholic Register, March 3rd, 2017).
The Demon of the Family
In October of 2017, in an interview with the Italian weekly Tempi, the exorcist Fr. César Truqui, a priest who participated in a 2015 course on exorcism held in Rome, stated that there is a demon that specializes in attacking the family. Fr. Truqui warned that everything that is harming the family, including divorce, pleases the devil. He said that there is “a demon who specializes in the attack on the family, also cited in the story of Tobias, called ‘Asmodeus.’” In the Old Testament book, the demon is known to have killed seven of Sarah’s husbands and was chained in the desert by Saint Raphael.
Fr. Truqui said the demon “is present” in many exorcisms, and recalled encountering the demon “in exorcisms by Father Gabriele Amorth and Father Francisco Bamonte, whom I assisted … I remember a young couple, very united, who wanted to get married, however, the woman had to undergo an exorcism to be set free!” During the exorcism “the demon was furious and threatened Fr. Amorth in order to prevent the marriage, otherwise he would kill the young woman. Obviously, it was a threat from the Liar which in fact did not happen.”
In that regard, the priest added that the devil also seeks to attack the family through ideologies and lifestyles, as well as individualistic thinking and the spread of divorce. “They think ‘if I don’t like my husband anymore, I would be better off divorcing’ but they forget about the consequences to the children and society,” he said. “This mentality, that works against the family, pleases the devil.”
Thoughts of a Deceased Priest
Here are a few thoughts from the blog of a Catholic priest (who died in 2016). They show the two-pronged attack that is being waged by the devil and his tools in this world, against the Catholic Family.
“I want to start by listing how the family is attacked today inside the Catholic Church;
● The Pope, many cardinals and bishops who for “pastoral” reasons think that couples living in adultery should be able to receive Holy Communion.
● At the recent Synod on The Family where in the first draft, adultery and sodomy were supported.
● Some cardinals, bishops, religious and priests are living the homosexual life and supporting homosexual unions and marriage in their dioceses and parishes.
● If you speak out against divorce or homosexual unions, then you are disliked and chided by many of the Catholic parishioners. It is very probable that you will also be called “on the carpet” by your pastor or bishop.
● Annulments are encouraged and relatively easy to obtain even when one of the parties believes their marriage is valid.
● There is an almost unanimous usage of birth control by most “practicing” Catholics. This undermines the end of marriage, which is conceiving children.
● Some Catholic hospitals allowing sterilization of men and women in their facilities.
● Catholic doctors prescribing birth control pills, tubal ligation, vasectomy and IUDs.
● Catholic pharmacist filling these prescriptions.
● Strong criticism or jokes directed at large Catholic families by other Catholic family members and people in general.
● Catholic youth having premarital sex and abortions at the same rate as non-Catholics.
● Catholic youth living together without the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony.
● Catholics believe in divorce and divorce at a rate equal to all non-Catholics.
● Increasing experimenting with homosexual sex by Catholic youth.
● Huge epidemic of men and young men, (some women are starting to too), indulging in and have the vice of pornography and masturbation. This terrible vice is brought into the marriage and causes hyper-sexual expectations that have nothing to do with procreation and are plain evil. Pornography causes the man [or woman] to see their spouse as an object for pleasure, rather than a holy spouse.
● Natural family planning is often used as a means of not conceiving children. Many times I have been told of the “let down” of a couple using Natural Family Planning when their “open to life” actually happens and the wife becomes pregnant. Many men sin by not having normal sexual relationships during the time of abstinence. Children are still seen as an option, rather than a blessing from God.
● The general belief today, among Catholics, that morals change and that sex before marriage, or adultery, divorce, homosexual sex and birth control are no longer immoral.
● There is also great pressure put on bishops, religious and priests to go along with the LBGT agenda by practicing homosexual Catholics. These people can make life very miserable, and even make threats on the lives of people, if they do not go along with them. The LBGT are feared like the ISIS are feared. They can put people who oppose them out of business, blackmail them, threaten them and be violent if they get in their way.
● A misunderstanding of what Christian compassion is. The pope, cardinals, religious and priests should be compassionate. But by supporting people in adultery and sodomy, instead of “loving the sinner” and helping him out of sin, they are “loving the sin” out of compassion, and that is wrong. Compassion means not allowing someone you love to be damned forever in the burning flames of Hell.
Here is how other non-Catholic churches influence our Catholic Families [presumably he means through our contact with them; also reading or hearing about them on the various media channels].
● Non-Catholic couples are divorcing and getting remarried in non-Catholic church services. This puts pressure on the Catholics to get divorce and remarried in church whenever there is some problem rather than fixing the problem.
● Ministers say there is nothing wrong with divorce and remarriage, as long as there has been some infidelity involved. This is contrary to the Holy Bible.
● Many non-Catholic churches welcome and marrying homosexual couples.
● Many non-Catholic “bishops”, “priests” and ministers have divorced and remarried or are openly living the homosexual sex life.
● There are also many non-Catholic churches who, as of yet, do not condone homosexual sex or marriage.
● Protestants are told that using birth control is a responsible thing.
As we can see, the family, your family, my family is being attacked in the Catholic Church as well as in the non-Catholic churches as well. But by our prayers, examples, sacrifices and humility we can help hold our family and other families together in God’s love. We are so blessed to know God’s plan for the happiness and love of our own families.”
Article 2
The Catholic Family Blueprint
The Catholic Family Blueprint
What Should a Catholic Family Be Like?
You have obviously heard of the term “blueprints”—a blueprint for something is a plan or set of proposals that shows how something is expected to look or work. A blueprint of an architect's building plans or a designer's pattern is a photographic print consisting of white lines on a blue background. Blueprints contain all of the information that is needed to build or make something. If you have ever watched a house being built, or if you have ever had an addition put onto an existing house, you know that the standard method of communication is a big piece of paper called a blueprint. Blueprinting is the standard method used to copy large architectural and construction drawings. A blueprint used to consist of white lines on a blue background. A more recent process uses blue lines on a white background.
Blue and white! Could we say those are the colors of Our Lady? For the purpose and point of this article—yes! If we can say “a mother is the heart of the family” then we can also say with even more assurance that “the Mother of God should be the heart of the Catholic family”! Without a heart, the body is dead—with the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the Catholic family is ‘dead’. Just as the heart pumps and circulates the life-giving blood throughout the body, so too does the Immaculate Heart of Mary pump and circulate life-giving graces throughout the Mystical Body. That is why the Church calls her the “Mediatrix of All Grace”.
The First Blueprint & the First Failure
God had a blueprint for the first family and that first family went and messed it all up! God created the perfect family—all that God makes is perfect—but when He put it in the hands of human beings, that’s when all the problems started! Adam and Eve—the first family on Earth—messed-up family life big-time! They wanted to do things THEIR WAY and not God’s way! God would later say through Isaias, His prophet: “My thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways My ways, saith the Lord. For as the Heavens are exalted above the Earth, so are My ways exalted above your ways, and My thoughts above your thoughts!” (Isaias 55:8-9). That streak of independence from God has never left the human race since Adam and Eve’s Original Sin—and miserable man continues to sing: “I Did It My Way!”
It is because we stubbornly persist is tinkering with God’s way and changing elements we don’t like to do things our way, that Christ came upon Earth to fix and remedy. As Pope Leo XIII writes in his encyclical Arcanum on Christian Marriage--“The hidden design which Jesus Christ the Savior of men came to carry out on Earth, had this end in view, that, by Himself and in Himself, He should divinely renew the world, which was sinking, as it were, with length of years into decline. The Apostle Paul summed this up thus: “That He might re-establish all things in Christ that are in Heaven and on Earth” (Ephesians 1:9-10). Christ our Lord straightway imparted a new form and fresh beauty to all things, taking away the effects of their time-worn age. For He healed the wounds which the sin of our first father had inflicted on the human race … He led to the light of truth, men worn-out by longstanding errors; He renewed to every virtue those who were weakened by lawlessness of every kind … He entrusted to His Church the continuance of His work and He commanded her to set in order whatever might have become deranged in human society, and to restore whatever might have fallen into ruin.” (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter: Arcanum, On Christian Marriage, 1880).
Ever since the Original Sin of the first family, as the pope says, “the sin of our first father had inflicted wounds on the human race”—ever since that time, families have been prone to failure, which is witnessed to and proved by the fact that—in the words of Our Lord, Our Lady, the saints and many reputable theologians—most souls (therefore families) are lost. This terrible drama of salvation or damnation is enacted and played-out on the knife-edge of God’s will. Those who want to tinker with and change the will or commands of God, risk also changing the destination that God would have liked for them—Heaven. Those who change nothing and do everything with regard to the will of God, cannot possible lose their souls. Is it worth the gamble? How well has your family fared when you have adjusted, changed and modified what God expects of the family? Nobody can do that and get away with it! Not even the saints could do that!
Learning from Leviticus
God quite clearly tells us the different consequences that we will experience—as both individuals and families—when we do things His way and when we do things our way. Towards the end of the Book of Leviticus, God lists His extreme rewards and extreme punishments. As Scripture says elsewhere—He rewards the good and punishes the evil, that is to say, He will reward the obedient and punish the disobedient—just like any family should.
As regards the obedient—those who will do things His way—He says:
“I am the Lord your God: If you walk in My precepts, and keep My commandments, and do them, I will give you rain in due seasons. And the ground shall bring forth its increase, and the trees shall be filled with fruit. The threshing of your harvest shall reach unto the vintage, and the vintage shall reach unto the sowing time: and you shall eat your bread to the full, and dwell in your land without fear.
“I will give peace in your coasts: you shall sleep, and there shall be none to make you afraid. I will take away evil beasts: and the sword shall not pass through your quarters. You shall pursue your enemies, and they shall fall before you. Five of yours shall pursue a hundred others, and a hundred of you ten thousand: your enemies shall fall before you by the sword.
“I will look on you, and make you increase: you shall be multiplied, and I will establish My covenant with you. I will set My tabernacle in the midst of you, and My soul shall not cast you off. I will walk among you, and will be your God, and you shall be My people. I am the Lord your God: who have brought you out of the land of the Egyptians, that you should not serve them, and I have broken the chains on your necks, that you might go upright.” (Leviticus 26:1-13).
Who wouldn’t want this? No shortage of food! Perfect seasons of the year! Peace in the land, with no threats from anywhere! If enemies arise, a guarantee of God’s help and protection—even if we are outnumbered! Guarantee of victory over all enemies! At peace with God! Wow! Extreme kindness!
The Flip-Side of the Coin!
“But if you will not hear Me, nor do all My commandments, if you despise My laws, and contemn My judgments so as not to do those things which are appointed by Me, and to make void My covenant: I also will do these things to you: I will quickly visit you with poverty, and burning heat, which shall waste your eyes, and consume your lives. You shall sow your seed in vain, which shall be devoured by your enemies. I will set My face against you, and you shall fall down before your enemies, and shall be made subject to them that hate you, you shall flee when no man pursueth you.
“But if you will not yet for all this obey Me: I will chastise you seven times more for your sins, and I will break the pride of your stubbornness, and I will make to you the Heaven above as iron, and the Earth as brass: your labour shall be spent in vain, the ground shall not bring forth her increase, nor the trees yield their fruit. If you walk contrary to Me, and will not hearken to Me, I will bring seven times more plagues upon you for your sins: and I will send in upon you the beasts of the field, to destroy you and your cattle, and make you few in number, and that your highways may be desolate.
“And if even so you will not amend, but will walk contrary to Me: I also will walk contrary to you, and will strike you seven times for your sins. And I will bring in upon you the sword that shall avenge My covenant. And when you shall flee into the cities, I will send the pestilence in the midst of you, and you shall be delivered into the hands of your enemies, after I shall have broken the staff of your bread: so that ten women shall bake your bread in one oven, and give it out by weight: and you shall eat, and shall not be filled.
“But if you will not for all this hearken to Me, but will walk against Me: I will also go against you with opposite fury, and I will chastise you with seven plagues for your sins, so that you shall eat the flesh of your sons and of your daughters. I will destroy your high places, and break your idols. You shall fall among the ruins of your idols, and My soul shall abhor you. And I will destroy your land, and your enemies shall be astonished at it, when they shall be the inhabitants thereof. And I will scatter you among the Gentiles, and I will draw out the sword after you, and your land shall be desert, and your cities destroyed.
“And as to them that shall remain of you I will send fear in their hearts in the countries of their enemies, the sound of a flying leaf shall terrify them, and they shall flee as it were from the sword: they shall fall, when no man pursueth them, And they shall every one fall upon their brethren as fleeing from wars, none of you shall dare to resist your enemies. You shall perish among the Gentiles, and an enemy’s land shall consume you. And if of them also some remain, they shall pine away in their iniquities, in the land of their enemies, and they shall be afflicted for the sins of their fathers, and their own: until they confess their iniquities and the iniquities of their ancestors, whereby they have transgressed me, and walked contrary unto Me.
“Therefore I also will bring them into their enemies’ land: then shall they pray for their sins. And I will remember My covenant, that I made with Jacob, and Isaac, and Abraham. But they shall pray for their sins, because they rejected My judgments, and despised My laws. And yet, for all that, when they were in the land of their enemies, I did not cast them off altogether, neither did I so despise them that they should be quite consumed, and I should make void My covenant with them. For I am the Lord their God. And I will remember My former covenant, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, in the sight of the Gentiles, to be their God. I am the Lord. These are the judgments, and precepts, and laws, which the Lord gave between Him and the children of Israel in Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses” (Leviticus 26:14-45).
Families Must Be Founded Upon God
Holy Scripture could not put it any plainer than this: “Unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. Unless the Lord keep the city, he watcheth in vain that keepeth it” (Psalms 126:1). Or, as Our Lord said: “Without Me, you can do nothing!” (John 15:5). That is why so many Catholic families amount to nothing—nothing but worldliness and little godliness. They fail to follow God’s blueprint for a happy and blessed life, instead, creating a hybrid blueprint that combines God and the world—failing to realize or failing to admit that God and the world are enemies. “Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, is the concupiscence of the flesh, and the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the Father, but is of the world!” (1 John 2:15-16). Adulterers! Know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God!” (James 4:4).
What Is the Family?
Whatever is made by whoever, belongs to whoever made it. If you buy, plant and grow fruits and vegetables in your own garden, with your own efforts and materials—then the fruit or vegetables belong to you. God made man—man and woman, they did not make themselves—therefore man and woman belong to God, they are owned by God, they are not independent of God. What is more, man and woman also happen to live in the apartment or house that God created—the Earth—and furthermore, they eat the food that God created: “And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein he placed man whom he had formed. And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold, and pleasant to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil ... And God said: ‘Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed upon the earth, and all trees that have in themselves seed of their own kind, to be your meat!’ … And God commanded: ‘Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat! But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat! For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death!” (Genesis 2:8-9; 1:29; 2:16-17).
Not only that, but God—since he owned man and woman, having created them—also gave them their “job-description” which was: “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it” (Genesis 1:28). In other words, God ‘married’ them and told them to produce a family. The “family” is a God given institution, marriage is the God-given bond that forms the family. Without the bond of matrimony, there is no real family—only a “pretend family” or “fake family”.
One Man, One Woman
Holy Scripture defines “family” in a narrow sense―as the union of one man and one woman in matrimony, which is normally blessed with one or several natural or adopted children. The prime purpose of marriage is not—as the moderns would have it to be—mutual love and pleasure, but the procreation of children and thus the cooperation with God in populating the Earth and keeping the human race in existence. God’s plan for creation was for men and women to marry and have children. A man and a woman would form a “one-flesh” union through marriage (Genesis 2:24), and they with their children become a family, the essential building block of human society.
“And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). These aspects of marriage―the complementarity of male and female, and the irreplaceable role of male-female relations in reproducing the human race―are part of the original order of creation, and are evident to all human beings from the enduring order of nature. These common elements of marriage are at the heart of our civil laws defining and regulating marriage. Therefore, people of all cultures and religions―including those who lack faith in God, Christ, or the Bible―are capable of participating in the institution of marriage. However, we who are Christians believe that the fullest understanding of God’s will for marriage can be derived from a careful examination of scriptural teachings. It is incumbent upon the church to educate both itself and the larger culture regarding the full breadth and depth of God’s intentions for marriage.
Extended Family
In a broad sense, this family also includes any other persons related by blood (the extended family). In the book of Genesis, we read that in the beginning first God created a man (Adam) to exercise dominion over his creation and subsequently a woman (Eve) as the man’s “suitable helper” (Genesis 2:18, 20). Then, the inspired writer remarks, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). This verse sets forth the biblical pattern as it was instituted by God at the beginning: one man is united to one woman in matrimony, and the two form one new natural family. In this regard, “become one flesh” not only refers to the establishment of one new family, but also to the husband and wife’s sexual union leading to the procreation of offspring and the growth of the family. This, in turn, is in keeping with God’s original command to the first human couple to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion” over all of creation (Genesis 1:28).
We also see early on that family members were to look after and care for one another. When God asks Cain, “Where is Abel, your brother?” Cain’s response is the flippant “Am I my brother’s keeper?” The implication is that, yes, Cain was expected to be Abel’s keeper and vice versa. Not only was Cain’s murder of his brother an offense against humanity in general, but it was especially serious because it was the first recorded case of fratricide (the murder of one’s own sibling).
The Bible shows a more communal sense of people and family than is generally held in Western cultures today, where citizens are more individualized, more so than people in the Middle East, and definitely more so than the people of the ancient near East. When God saved Noe from the flood, it wasn’t an individual case of salvation, but a salvation for him, his wife, his sons and his sons’ wives. In other words, his family was saved (Genesis 6:18). When God called Abraham out of Haran, He called him and his family (Genesis 12:4-5). The sign of the Abrahamic covenant (circumcision) was to be applied to all males within one’s household, whether they were born into the family, or are part of the household servant staff (Genesis 17:12-13). In other words, God’s covenant with Abraham was familial, not individual.
Commandments Protect the Family
The importance of family can be seen in the provisions of the Mosaic covenant. For example, four of the Ten Commandments deal with maintaining the cohesiveness and well-being of the family. The fourth commandment regarding honoring parents is meant to preserve the authority of parents in family matters, and the sixth and ninth commandments prohibiting adultery in thought or in action, protects the sanctity of marriage. The eighth commandments forbids the causing of division by prohibiting the bearing of false witness against our neighbor (and thus hurting him and his family). The seventh commandment prohibiting killing, prevents loss to some family that would lose one if its members. All of these commandments are concerned—directly or indirectly—with the well-being and safeguarding of families. The welfare of the family was so important to God that it was codified in the national covenant of Israel.
This is not solely an Old Testament phenomenon. The New Testament makes many of the same commands and prohibitions. Jesus speaks on the sanctity of marriage and against frivolous divorce in Matthew 19. The Apostle Paul talks about what Christian homes should look like when he gives the twin commands of “children, obey your parents” and “parents, don’t provoke your children” in Ephesians 6:1-4 and Colossians 3:20-21. Furthermore, we see similar New Testament concepts regarding the importance of family in the process of salvation in the book of Acts when on two separate occasions during Paul’s second missionary journey, entire households were baptized at the conversion of one individual (Acts 16:11-15, 16:31-33). It is interesting to note that, just as the Old Testament sign of the covenant (circumcision) was applied to whole families, so also the New Testament sign of the covenant (baptism) was applied to entire households. We can make an argument that when God saves an individual, His desire is for the family to be saved―even though not all will be saved, because not all will do what is necessary to be saved. Clearly, God’s desire isn’t just to save isolated individuals, but entire households. In 1 Corinthians 7, the unbelieving spouse is sanctified through the believing spouse, meaning, among other things, that the unbelieving spouse is in a position to be saved through the witness of the believing spouse.
You have obviously heard of the term “blueprints”—a blueprint for something is a plan or set of proposals that shows how something is expected to look or work. A blueprint of an architect's building plans or a designer's pattern is a photographic print consisting of white lines on a blue background. Blueprints contain all of the information that is needed to build or make something. If you have ever watched a house being built, or if you have ever had an addition put onto an existing house, you know that the standard method of communication is a big piece of paper called a blueprint. Blueprinting is the standard method used to copy large architectural and construction drawings. A blueprint used to consist of white lines on a blue background. A more recent process uses blue lines on a white background.
Blue and white! Could we say those are the colors of Our Lady? For the purpose and point of this article—yes! If we can say “a mother is the heart of the family” then we can also say with even more assurance that “the Mother of God should be the heart of the Catholic family”! Without a heart, the body is dead—with the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the Catholic family is ‘dead’. Just as the heart pumps and circulates the life-giving blood throughout the body, so too does the Immaculate Heart of Mary pump and circulate life-giving graces throughout the Mystical Body. That is why the Church calls her the “Mediatrix of All Grace”.
The First Blueprint & the First Failure
God had a blueprint for the first family and that first family went and messed it all up! God created the perfect family—all that God makes is perfect—but when He put it in the hands of human beings, that’s when all the problems started! Adam and Eve—the first family on Earth—messed-up family life big-time! They wanted to do things THEIR WAY and not God’s way! God would later say through Isaias, His prophet: “My thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways My ways, saith the Lord. For as the Heavens are exalted above the Earth, so are My ways exalted above your ways, and My thoughts above your thoughts!” (Isaias 55:8-9). That streak of independence from God has never left the human race since Adam and Eve’s Original Sin—and miserable man continues to sing: “I Did It My Way!”
It is because we stubbornly persist is tinkering with God’s way and changing elements we don’t like to do things our way, that Christ came upon Earth to fix and remedy. As Pope Leo XIII writes in his encyclical Arcanum on Christian Marriage--“The hidden design which Jesus Christ the Savior of men came to carry out on Earth, had this end in view, that, by Himself and in Himself, He should divinely renew the world, which was sinking, as it were, with length of years into decline. The Apostle Paul summed this up thus: “That He might re-establish all things in Christ that are in Heaven and on Earth” (Ephesians 1:9-10). Christ our Lord straightway imparted a new form and fresh beauty to all things, taking away the effects of their time-worn age. For He healed the wounds which the sin of our first father had inflicted on the human race … He led to the light of truth, men worn-out by longstanding errors; He renewed to every virtue those who were weakened by lawlessness of every kind … He entrusted to His Church the continuance of His work and He commanded her to set in order whatever might have become deranged in human society, and to restore whatever might have fallen into ruin.” (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter: Arcanum, On Christian Marriage, 1880).
Ever since the Original Sin of the first family, as the pope says, “the sin of our first father had inflicted wounds on the human race”—ever since that time, families have been prone to failure, which is witnessed to and proved by the fact that—in the words of Our Lord, Our Lady, the saints and many reputable theologians—most souls (therefore families) are lost. This terrible drama of salvation or damnation is enacted and played-out on the knife-edge of God’s will. Those who want to tinker with and change the will or commands of God, risk also changing the destination that God would have liked for them—Heaven. Those who change nothing and do everything with regard to the will of God, cannot possible lose their souls. Is it worth the gamble? How well has your family fared when you have adjusted, changed and modified what God expects of the family? Nobody can do that and get away with it! Not even the saints could do that!
Learning from Leviticus
God quite clearly tells us the different consequences that we will experience—as both individuals and families—when we do things His way and when we do things our way. Towards the end of the Book of Leviticus, God lists His extreme rewards and extreme punishments. As Scripture says elsewhere—He rewards the good and punishes the evil, that is to say, He will reward the obedient and punish the disobedient—just like any family should.
As regards the obedient—those who will do things His way—He says:
“I am the Lord your God: If you walk in My precepts, and keep My commandments, and do them, I will give you rain in due seasons. And the ground shall bring forth its increase, and the trees shall be filled with fruit. The threshing of your harvest shall reach unto the vintage, and the vintage shall reach unto the sowing time: and you shall eat your bread to the full, and dwell in your land without fear.
“I will give peace in your coasts: you shall sleep, and there shall be none to make you afraid. I will take away evil beasts: and the sword shall not pass through your quarters. You shall pursue your enemies, and they shall fall before you. Five of yours shall pursue a hundred others, and a hundred of you ten thousand: your enemies shall fall before you by the sword.
“I will look on you, and make you increase: you shall be multiplied, and I will establish My covenant with you. I will set My tabernacle in the midst of you, and My soul shall not cast you off. I will walk among you, and will be your God, and you shall be My people. I am the Lord your God: who have brought you out of the land of the Egyptians, that you should not serve them, and I have broken the chains on your necks, that you might go upright.” (Leviticus 26:1-13).
Who wouldn’t want this? No shortage of food! Perfect seasons of the year! Peace in the land, with no threats from anywhere! If enemies arise, a guarantee of God’s help and protection—even if we are outnumbered! Guarantee of victory over all enemies! At peace with God! Wow! Extreme kindness!
The Flip-Side of the Coin!
“But if you will not hear Me, nor do all My commandments, if you despise My laws, and contemn My judgments so as not to do those things which are appointed by Me, and to make void My covenant: I also will do these things to you: I will quickly visit you with poverty, and burning heat, which shall waste your eyes, and consume your lives. You shall sow your seed in vain, which shall be devoured by your enemies. I will set My face against you, and you shall fall down before your enemies, and shall be made subject to them that hate you, you shall flee when no man pursueth you.
“But if you will not yet for all this obey Me: I will chastise you seven times more for your sins, and I will break the pride of your stubbornness, and I will make to you the Heaven above as iron, and the Earth as brass: your labour shall be spent in vain, the ground shall not bring forth her increase, nor the trees yield their fruit. If you walk contrary to Me, and will not hearken to Me, I will bring seven times more plagues upon you for your sins: and I will send in upon you the beasts of the field, to destroy you and your cattle, and make you few in number, and that your highways may be desolate.
“And if even so you will not amend, but will walk contrary to Me: I also will walk contrary to you, and will strike you seven times for your sins. And I will bring in upon you the sword that shall avenge My covenant. And when you shall flee into the cities, I will send the pestilence in the midst of you, and you shall be delivered into the hands of your enemies, after I shall have broken the staff of your bread: so that ten women shall bake your bread in one oven, and give it out by weight: and you shall eat, and shall not be filled.
“But if you will not for all this hearken to Me, but will walk against Me: I will also go against you with opposite fury, and I will chastise you with seven plagues for your sins, so that you shall eat the flesh of your sons and of your daughters. I will destroy your high places, and break your idols. You shall fall among the ruins of your idols, and My soul shall abhor you. And I will destroy your land, and your enemies shall be astonished at it, when they shall be the inhabitants thereof. And I will scatter you among the Gentiles, and I will draw out the sword after you, and your land shall be desert, and your cities destroyed.
“And as to them that shall remain of you I will send fear in their hearts in the countries of their enemies, the sound of a flying leaf shall terrify them, and they shall flee as it were from the sword: they shall fall, when no man pursueth them, And they shall every one fall upon their brethren as fleeing from wars, none of you shall dare to resist your enemies. You shall perish among the Gentiles, and an enemy’s land shall consume you. And if of them also some remain, they shall pine away in their iniquities, in the land of their enemies, and they shall be afflicted for the sins of their fathers, and their own: until they confess their iniquities and the iniquities of their ancestors, whereby they have transgressed me, and walked contrary unto Me.
“Therefore I also will bring them into their enemies’ land: then shall they pray for their sins. And I will remember My covenant, that I made with Jacob, and Isaac, and Abraham. But they shall pray for their sins, because they rejected My judgments, and despised My laws. And yet, for all that, when they were in the land of their enemies, I did not cast them off altogether, neither did I so despise them that they should be quite consumed, and I should make void My covenant with them. For I am the Lord their God. And I will remember My former covenant, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, in the sight of the Gentiles, to be their God. I am the Lord. These are the judgments, and precepts, and laws, which the Lord gave between Him and the children of Israel in Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses” (Leviticus 26:14-45).
Families Must Be Founded Upon God
Holy Scripture could not put it any plainer than this: “Unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. Unless the Lord keep the city, he watcheth in vain that keepeth it” (Psalms 126:1). Or, as Our Lord said: “Without Me, you can do nothing!” (John 15:5). That is why so many Catholic families amount to nothing—nothing but worldliness and little godliness. They fail to follow God’s blueprint for a happy and blessed life, instead, creating a hybrid blueprint that combines God and the world—failing to realize or failing to admit that God and the world are enemies. “Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, is the concupiscence of the flesh, and the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the Father, but is of the world!” (1 John 2:15-16). Adulterers! Know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God!” (James 4:4).
What Is the Family?
Whatever is made by whoever, belongs to whoever made it. If you buy, plant and grow fruits and vegetables in your own garden, with your own efforts and materials—then the fruit or vegetables belong to you. God made man—man and woman, they did not make themselves—therefore man and woman belong to God, they are owned by God, they are not independent of God. What is more, man and woman also happen to live in the apartment or house that God created—the Earth—and furthermore, they eat the food that God created: “And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein he placed man whom he had formed. And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold, and pleasant to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil ... And God said: ‘Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed upon the earth, and all trees that have in themselves seed of their own kind, to be your meat!’ … And God commanded: ‘Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat! But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat! For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death!” (Genesis 2:8-9; 1:29; 2:16-17).
Not only that, but God—since he owned man and woman, having created them—also gave them their “job-description” which was: “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it” (Genesis 1:28). In other words, God ‘married’ them and told them to produce a family. The “family” is a God given institution, marriage is the God-given bond that forms the family. Without the bond of matrimony, there is no real family—only a “pretend family” or “fake family”.
One Man, One Woman
Holy Scripture defines “family” in a narrow sense―as the union of one man and one woman in matrimony, which is normally blessed with one or several natural or adopted children. The prime purpose of marriage is not—as the moderns would have it to be—mutual love and pleasure, but the procreation of children and thus the cooperation with God in populating the Earth and keeping the human race in existence. God’s plan for creation was for men and women to marry and have children. A man and a woman would form a “one-flesh” union through marriage (Genesis 2:24), and they with their children become a family, the essential building block of human society.
“And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). These aspects of marriage―the complementarity of male and female, and the irreplaceable role of male-female relations in reproducing the human race―are part of the original order of creation, and are evident to all human beings from the enduring order of nature. These common elements of marriage are at the heart of our civil laws defining and regulating marriage. Therefore, people of all cultures and religions―including those who lack faith in God, Christ, or the Bible―are capable of participating in the institution of marriage. However, we who are Christians believe that the fullest understanding of God’s will for marriage can be derived from a careful examination of scriptural teachings. It is incumbent upon the church to educate both itself and the larger culture regarding the full breadth and depth of God’s intentions for marriage.
Extended Family
In a broad sense, this family also includes any other persons related by blood (the extended family). In the book of Genesis, we read that in the beginning first God created a man (Adam) to exercise dominion over his creation and subsequently a woman (Eve) as the man’s “suitable helper” (Genesis 2:18, 20). Then, the inspired writer remarks, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). This verse sets forth the biblical pattern as it was instituted by God at the beginning: one man is united to one woman in matrimony, and the two form one new natural family. In this regard, “become one flesh” not only refers to the establishment of one new family, but also to the husband and wife’s sexual union leading to the procreation of offspring and the growth of the family. This, in turn, is in keeping with God’s original command to the first human couple to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion” over all of creation (Genesis 1:28).
We also see early on that family members were to look after and care for one another. When God asks Cain, “Where is Abel, your brother?” Cain’s response is the flippant “Am I my brother’s keeper?” The implication is that, yes, Cain was expected to be Abel’s keeper and vice versa. Not only was Cain’s murder of his brother an offense against humanity in general, but it was especially serious because it was the first recorded case of fratricide (the murder of one’s own sibling).
The Bible shows a more communal sense of people and family than is generally held in Western cultures today, where citizens are more individualized, more so than people in the Middle East, and definitely more so than the people of the ancient near East. When God saved Noe from the flood, it wasn’t an individual case of salvation, but a salvation for him, his wife, his sons and his sons’ wives. In other words, his family was saved (Genesis 6:18). When God called Abraham out of Haran, He called him and his family (Genesis 12:4-5). The sign of the Abrahamic covenant (circumcision) was to be applied to all males within one’s household, whether they were born into the family, or are part of the household servant staff (Genesis 17:12-13). In other words, God’s covenant with Abraham was familial, not individual.
Commandments Protect the Family
The importance of family can be seen in the provisions of the Mosaic covenant. For example, four of the Ten Commandments deal with maintaining the cohesiveness and well-being of the family. The fourth commandment regarding honoring parents is meant to preserve the authority of parents in family matters, and the sixth and ninth commandments prohibiting adultery in thought or in action, protects the sanctity of marriage. The eighth commandments forbids the causing of division by prohibiting the bearing of false witness against our neighbor (and thus hurting him and his family). The seventh commandment prohibiting killing, prevents loss to some family that would lose one if its members. All of these commandments are concerned—directly or indirectly—with the well-being and safeguarding of families. The welfare of the family was so important to God that it was codified in the national covenant of Israel.
This is not solely an Old Testament phenomenon. The New Testament makes many of the same commands and prohibitions. Jesus speaks on the sanctity of marriage and against frivolous divorce in Matthew 19. The Apostle Paul talks about what Christian homes should look like when he gives the twin commands of “children, obey your parents” and “parents, don’t provoke your children” in Ephesians 6:1-4 and Colossians 3:20-21. Furthermore, we see similar New Testament concepts regarding the importance of family in the process of salvation in the book of Acts when on two separate occasions during Paul’s second missionary journey, entire households were baptized at the conversion of one individual (Acts 16:11-15, 16:31-33). It is interesting to note that, just as the Old Testament sign of the covenant (circumcision) was applied to whole families, so also the New Testament sign of the covenant (baptism) was applied to entire households. We can make an argument that when God saves an individual, His desire is for the family to be saved―even though not all will be saved, because not all will do what is necessary to be saved. Clearly, God’s desire isn’t just to save isolated individuals, but entire households. In 1 Corinthians 7, the unbelieving spouse is sanctified through the believing spouse, meaning, among other things, that the unbelieving spouse is in a position to be saved through the witness of the believing spouse.
Article 3
The World's Family Blueprint! The Catholic Blueprint! What's Your Blueprint?
The World's Family Blueprint! The Catholic Blueprint! What's Your Blueprint?
Modern Family: What are main Features of a Modern Family?
The following, to avoid unnecessary debate, argument and accusations of bias—is taken from a sociology website, which lists some of the chief features of modern family being as follows:
(1) Decreased Control of the Marriage Contract Marriage is the Basis of Family:
In traditional family the marriage was contracted by the parents (here the writer refers to the practice of arranged marriages in ancient times). The marriage ceremony was based on the principle of male dominance and female obedience. In modern family people are less subject to the parental control concerning whom and when they shall marry. The marriage is now settled by the partners themselves. It is choice of mate by mate usually preceded by courtship or falling in love.
(2) Changes in the Relationship of Man and Woman:
In modern family the woman is not the devotee of man but an equal partner in life with equal rights. The husband now does not dictate but only requests the wife to do a task for him. She is now emancipated of the man’s slavery. She is no longer the drudge and slave of olden days. She can divorce her husband as the husband can divorce her. She can sue the husband for her rights and likewise be sued.
(3) Laxity in Sex Relationships:
The rigidity traditionally associated with sexual relationships no longer characterizes the modern family, cases of illegitimate sex relationship of the husband and wife too can be seen in modern family.
(4) Economic Independence:
Women in modern family have attained an increasing degree of economic independence. It is not only the husband who leaves the home for work but it is also the wife who goes out of doors for work. The percentage of women employed outside the home is continually on the increase. In India the number of women going out for employment is steadily increasing.
In upper classes women are property owners and in lower classes they are wage earners or professional workers. This economic independence has largely affected the attitude of modern woman. Formerly she had no choice but to find a male partner who could marry her and support her economically. She now does not feel helpless before man, but settles matters with him in terms of her own.
She is not a slave of the man who provides her with food, clothing and shelter, but she can now earn her own living. Such a feature did not mark the traditional family. According to MacIver and Page, “Not only the economic and the religious changes, but the whole process of modern civilization within which they fall, has worked towards giving woman a new position in society and specially in relation to man.” In short, woman in the modern family has come as near achieving equality with men and children achieving emancipation (freedom) from parents.
(5) Smaller Family:
The modern family is a smaller family. It is no longer a joint family. Moreover the tendency is to have a smaller family and the contraceptives help in checking the birth.
(6) Decline of Religious Control:
The modern family is secular in attitude. The religious rites of the traditional family such as morning and evening prayers, etc. are no longer performed in modern family. Marriage also has become a civil contract rather than a religious sacrament. It can be broken at any hour. The authority of religion over the conditions of marriage and divorce has markedly declined. Divorce is a frequent occurrence in modern family. In traditional family it was a rare phenomenon.
(7) Separation of Non-Essential Functions:
The modern family has given up a great many functions which were performed by the traditional family. These functions have now been taken over by specialized agencies. Thus the hospital offers room for the birth of child, in the nursing home he is brought up, in the kindergarten he is educated and in the playground he recreates.
Not only this much, but many of the traditional tasks of the household―such as cooking and baking, cleaning and washing―are also performed outside the household by specialized agencies. The process advances still further as more and more families rely upon prepared and manufactured goods consumed by the family.
(8) Filo-Centric (Child-Centered) Family:
In the modern family the trend is towards the filo-centric family. A filo-centric (child-centered) family is one wherein the children tend to dominate the scene and their wishes determine the policy of the family. In modern family physical punishment is rarely awarded to the children. The children now decide which school they will study in, what clothes they will wear, what food will be cooked and which movie they will go to enjoy.
Thus the family has been subjected to profound modifications of an economic, social and biological nature. The modern family is no longer the economic and self-sufficient unit. The women are no longer subordinated to the male dominance and are no longer confined to the drudgery of incessant toil in addition to the continual bearing of children.
The use of contraception has reduced the number of children born during marriage. Ceremony and religion have lost almost all connection with the home as an entity. The individuation of family members has reached a point beyond which it cannot go. The size and functions of the family have been reduced. It has suffered a change in regard to both its structure and functions.
It now consists of the married couple and two or three children. Even this smallest family unit has shown a tendency towards instability. Its functions have been taken over by several specialized agencies. The functions of the present day family tend to revolve around personality. Burgess referred to the modern family as “a unity of interacting personalities.” The modern family is more individualized and democratic where women enjoy a high prestige and position. From being an institution, it has moved towards companionship.
A Catholic Blueprint—Do We Even Need One?
Call it a “blueprint”, call it a “plan”, call it a “recipe”, call it a “design”, call it a “curriculum”, call it a “timetable”, call it a “musical score”, call it “tactics” or something similar—whenever we make or do something of great importance in this world, one of those things are needed are needed. Let us first look at the concept of blueprints and then look to see if their a Catholic family ought to use a blueprint for its daily and annual life.
What’s the Purpose and Advantage of Blueprints?
Blueprints are used for a multitude of purposes. Assuming you have product you want to produce for use in your business or for resale, the blueprint provides several useful functions.
(1) A blueprint defines what you want to make, what it looks like and how many parts are used to product the product (that would be a list of materials used to make the object).
(2) The other purpose is to define what you have made so you can reproduce it again at a later date and have it be an exact copy of the original.
(3) The blueprint will also help you analyze your product after the fact. Assume that there is a problem with the product. The blueprint will enable you to analyze your product, identify pitfalls in the design and make necessary corrections (usually called revisions) to the product so as to product a better product in the future.
Often, if you are designing a product for a customer, the blueprint enables the customer to look at your design and confirm that the design is going in the desired direction or make notations where the design is not going in the desired direction.
But I Don’t Need a Blueprint!
People will frequently ask, why do I need a blueprint? Why can't I just start building what I need, I know what it looks like and how it should work, and I don't need a blueprint to follow in making it. That concern is easily answered by the following:
(1) Trying to design on the fly, so to speak, runs the risk of producing a flawed product. By not having a blueprint, you make mistakes and oftentimes you do not recognize these errors until you have gone too far with the construction of the project and undoing the work would be time consuming not to mention making you look foolish.
(2) Creating a blueprint forces you to look at the big picture, see the interaction of the various components and make sure it fits together.
Some people will say they do not need a blueprint, because they have made this product so many times that a blueprint just slows them down. Just keep in mind that the individual working from memory (no blueprint) has some form of experience on his side just like knowing your prayers without having to use a prayer card all the time. But that approach can lead to sloppy behavior, and lack of attention to detail.
So What Else Does a Blueprint Do?
(1) Complicated projects have multiple blueprints which each address the various sub-systems and each of these sub-systems must be coordinated with the overall project so that everything works together.
(2) Someone must review all of the blueprints to be sure all the various systems work together.
(3) Blueprints also help control cost. There is less waste when the whole picture is viewed together, that saves money, time and effort. Bad blueprints or no blueprints will waste money or cost money down the road when they try to build the product.
(4) Creating a blueprint also helps you, the designer identify pitfalls or problem areas. Something like designing a widget part "A" and you find our you need to modify your design for widget part "B" so they will function together. Without careful attention to detail, this non fit of "A" and "B" would not be discovered until it was too late or too costly to fix.
Another blueprint problem is a territorial dispute. Two people will say they do not need a blueprint, that they can do a better job of making the part. Each person will try to introduce their own personality into the project, thereby each producing dis-similar products. Now you have lost that "interchangeability" of parts. See what pride does to a product. A blueprint is in and of itself a humbling experience. A blueprint is created for the greater good of the whole, not for a piece of the whole to be elevated above the rest.
Do You Have a Family Blueprint? Do You Need a Family Blueprint?
It is quite likely that you somehow “sense” the answer to the above questions. Most families do have a blueprint when it comes to finances (we call that ‘blueprint’ a “budget”). They have a food and nutrition ‘blueprint’ (we call that their “regular shopping list”). They also have a physical health ‘blueprint’ whereby they choose their insurance plan and the health care professionals they wish to use. They also have a social ‘blueprint’, whereby they more or less have mapped-out what their annual social activities and entertainment will be—always allowing for tweaking here and there. They have an educational ‘blueprint’, whereby they choose what form of education their children will receive—public, private, Catholic or non-Catholic schools.
Yet when it comes to a spiritual blueprint—most, almost all, Catholic families fail miserably. Their only blueprint is trying to reach sanctity and Heaven on “a wing and a prayer”! There is no real planning; there is no methodical plan that has been researched, reflected upon, put down on paper, passed-by the spiritual director (nobody has one apart from a priest they confess to—but that is all they do, simply confess without a plan). It is perhaps the greatest anomaly and idiocy that you can imagine! They want to undertake the most difficult journey that man can make—from Earth to Heaven--“Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!” (Matthew 7:13-14)—yet they can’t be bothered to study the ‘road map’, learn about the skills required, nor familiarize themselves with the pitfalls, nor inclined to ask to directions and advice! Why is it that so few souls are saved? This is one of the reasons!
Our Lord said: “Learn of Me!” (Matthew 11:29). Our Lord is the ‘blueprint’ that we must follow! “And he said to all: ‘If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me!’” (Luke 9:23). We even have the classic spiritual ‘blueprint’ entitled The Imitation of Christ—and many other similar spiritual ‘road-map’ books—but very few even pick them up, never mind about systematically studying them—yet there is plenty of time for studying the television, the internet and social media! As for spiritual direction, just like buying gasoline, we look for the cheapest (easiest option), for, as Fr. Faber writes, we seek “to avoid anything which will restore animation to the conscience. We prefer to remain under chloroform for life. Thus we shrink from anything like vigorous spiritual direction. We suspect we shall be awakened, and driven, and made too good. Discretion―that is, the discretion of the blind conscience―tells us that this shrinking is wisdom and sagacity. We must, it says, be moderate in everything, but of all things amazingly moderate in the love of God! So in hearing sermons, reading books, cultivating acquaintances, patronizing works of mercy, it draws back from everything that is likely to come too near or hit too hard” (Fr. Faber, Growth in Holiness). We seek out the best affordable doctors, teachers, coaches, music teachers, tutors, etc. for our family, but when it comes to seeking a ‘coach’ or ‘teacher’ or ‘tutor’ for the spiritual life, we just can’t be bothered—even though it wouldn’t even cost us a dollar!
To souls with such an attitude, Our Lord says, as He did to the well-meaning but hypocritical Pharisees: “Can the blind lead the blind? Do they not both fall into the ditch? … Let them alone! They are blind, and leaders of the blind! And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the pit!” (Luke 6:39; Matthew 15:14). That is how so many families fall into “the pit”--“For many are called, but few are chosen!” (Matthew 22:14). “Seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand!” (Matthew 13:13). “Hear, O foolish people, and without understanding: who have eyes, and see not: and ears, and hear not!” (Jeremias 5:21).
Mary the Blueprint for Our Age
St. Louis de Montfort calls Mary the mold (living blueprint) into which we cast ourselves to be formed into a perfect imitation of Christ: “Mary is a holy place, and the holy of holies where saints are formed and molded. Take notice, if you please, that I say the saints are molded in Mary. There is a great difference between making a figure in relief by blows of hammer and chisel, and making a figure by throwing it into a mold. Statuaries and sculptors labor much to make figures in the first manner; but to make them in the second manner, they work little and do their work quickly. St. Augustine calls our Blessed Lady ‘the mold of God’―the mold fit to cast and mold gods. He who is cast in this mold is presently formed and molded in Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ in him. At a slight expense and in a short time he will become God, because he has been cast in the same mold which has formed a God.
“It seems to me that I can very aptly compare directors and devout persons, who wish to form Jesus Christ in themselves or others, to sculptors who trust in their own professional skill, ingenuity or art, and so give an infinity of hammering and chiseling to a hard stone or a piece of badly polished wood, to make an image of Jesus Christ out of it. Sometimes they do not succeed in giving anything like the natural expression of Jesus, either from having no knowledge or experience of the Person of Jesus, or from some blow awkwardly given, which has spoiled the work [this is the case of most families—they have no knowledge or experience, often because of indifference or sloth in learning]. But those who embrace the secret of grace which I am revealing to them I may rightly compare to founders and casters who have discovered the beautiful mold of Mary, where Jesus was naturally and divinely formed; and without trusting in their own skill, but only in the goodness of the mold, they cast themselves and lose themselves in Mary, to become the faithful portraits of Jesus Christ. Oh, beautiful and true comparison! But who will comprehend it? I desire that you may, my dear brother. But remember that we cast in a mold only what is melted and liquid; that is to say, you must destroy and melt down in yourself the old Adam to become the new one in Mary. By this practice, faithfully observed, you will give Jesus more glory in a month than by any other practice, however difficult, in many years” (St. Louis de Montfort. True Devotion to Mary, §219 to §222).
Our Lady confirms that she is the “blueprint” for our age when she says: “Pray the Rosary every day in honor of Our Lady of the Rosary, in order to obtain peace for the world and the end of the war, because only she can help you!” (Fatima, July 13th, 1917) and “Pray very much the prayers of the Rosary! I alone am able still to save you from the calamities which approach. Those who place their confidence in me will be saved!” (Akita, October 13th, 1973). To which Sr. Lucia of Fatima added in 1957: “Prayer and sacrifice are the two means to save the world. As for the Holy Rosary, Father, in these last times in which we are living, the Blessed Virgin has given a new efficacy to the praying of the Holy Rosary. This in such a way that there is no problem that cannot be resolved by praying the Rosary, no matter how difficult it is ― be it temporal or above all spiritual ― in the spiritual life of each of us, or the lives of our families, be they our families in the world or Religious Communities, or even in the lives of peoples and nations. I repeat, there is no problem, as difficult as it may be, that we cannot resolve at this time by praying the Holy Rosary. With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves, sanctify ourselves, console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls. Then, there is devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Most Holy Mother, holding her as the seat of mercy, goodness and pardon and the sure door to enter Heaven.”
The following, to avoid unnecessary debate, argument and accusations of bias—is taken from a sociology website, which lists some of the chief features of modern family being as follows:
(1) Decreased Control of the Marriage Contract Marriage is the Basis of Family:
In traditional family the marriage was contracted by the parents (here the writer refers to the practice of arranged marriages in ancient times). The marriage ceremony was based on the principle of male dominance and female obedience. In modern family people are less subject to the parental control concerning whom and when they shall marry. The marriage is now settled by the partners themselves. It is choice of mate by mate usually preceded by courtship or falling in love.
(2) Changes in the Relationship of Man and Woman:
In modern family the woman is not the devotee of man but an equal partner in life with equal rights. The husband now does not dictate but only requests the wife to do a task for him. She is now emancipated of the man’s slavery. She is no longer the drudge and slave of olden days. She can divorce her husband as the husband can divorce her. She can sue the husband for her rights and likewise be sued.
(3) Laxity in Sex Relationships:
The rigidity traditionally associated with sexual relationships no longer characterizes the modern family, cases of illegitimate sex relationship of the husband and wife too can be seen in modern family.
(4) Economic Independence:
Women in modern family have attained an increasing degree of economic independence. It is not only the husband who leaves the home for work but it is also the wife who goes out of doors for work. The percentage of women employed outside the home is continually on the increase. In India the number of women going out for employment is steadily increasing.
In upper classes women are property owners and in lower classes they are wage earners or professional workers. This economic independence has largely affected the attitude of modern woman. Formerly she had no choice but to find a male partner who could marry her and support her economically. She now does not feel helpless before man, but settles matters with him in terms of her own.
She is not a slave of the man who provides her with food, clothing and shelter, but she can now earn her own living. Such a feature did not mark the traditional family. According to MacIver and Page, “Not only the economic and the religious changes, but the whole process of modern civilization within which they fall, has worked towards giving woman a new position in society and specially in relation to man.” In short, woman in the modern family has come as near achieving equality with men and children achieving emancipation (freedom) from parents.
(5) Smaller Family:
The modern family is a smaller family. It is no longer a joint family. Moreover the tendency is to have a smaller family and the contraceptives help in checking the birth.
(6) Decline of Religious Control:
The modern family is secular in attitude. The religious rites of the traditional family such as morning and evening prayers, etc. are no longer performed in modern family. Marriage also has become a civil contract rather than a religious sacrament. It can be broken at any hour. The authority of religion over the conditions of marriage and divorce has markedly declined. Divorce is a frequent occurrence in modern family. In traditional family it was a rare phenomenon.
(7) Separation of Non-Essential Functions:
The modern family has given up a great many functions which were performed by the traditional family. These functions have now been taken over by specialized agencies. Thus the hospital offers room for the birth of child, in the nursing home he is brought up, in the kindergarten he is educated and in the playground he recreates.
Not only this much, but many of the traditional tasks of the household―such as cooking and baking, cleaning and washing―are also performed outside the household by specialized agencies. The process advances still further as more and more families rely upon prepared and manufactured goods consumed by the family.
(8) Filo-Centric (Child-Centered) Family:
In the modern family the trend is towards the filo-centric family. A filo-centric (child-centered) family is one wherein the children tend to dominate the scene and their wishes determine the policy of the family. In modern family physical punishment is rarely awarded to the children. The children now decide which school they will study in, what clothes they will wear, what food will be cooked and which movie they will go to enjoy.
Thus the family has been subjected to profound modifications of an economic, social and biological nature. The modern family is no longer the economic and self-sufficient unit. The women are no longer subordinated to the male dominance and are no longer confined to the drudgery of incessant toil in addition to the continual bearing of children.
The use of contraception has reduced the number of children born during marriage. Ceremony and religion have lost almost all connection with the home as an entity. The individuation of family members has reached a point beyond which it cannot go. The size and functions of the family have been reduced. It has suffered a change in regard to both its structure and functions.
It now consists of the married couple and two or three children. Even this smallest family unit has shown a tendency towards instability. Its functions have been taken over by several specialized agencies. The functions of the present day family tend to revolve around personality. Burgess referred to the modern family as “a unity of interacting personalities.” The modern family is more individualized and democratic where women enjoy a high prestige and position. From being an institution, it has moved towards companionship.
A Catholic Blueprint—Do We Even Need One?
Call it a “blueprint”, call it a “plan”, call it a “recipe”, call it a “design”, call it a “curriculum”, call it a “timetable”, call it a “musical score”, call it “tactics” or something similar—whenever we make or do something of great importance in this world, one of those things are needed are needed. Let us first look at the concept of blueprints and then look to see if their a Catholic family ought to use a blueprint for its daily and annual life.
What’s the Purpose and Advantage of Blueprints?
Blueprints are used for a multitude of purposes. Assuming you have product you want to produce for use in your business or for resale, the blueprint provides several useful functions.
(1) A blueprint defines what you want to make, what it looks like and how many parts are used to product the product (that would be a list of materials used to make the object).
(2) The other purpose is to define what you have made so you can reproduce it again at a later date and have it be an exact copy of the original.
(3) The blueprint will also help you analyze your product after the fact. Assume that there is a problem with the product. The blueprint will enable you to analyze your product, identify pitfalls in the design and make necessary corrections (usually called revisions) to the product so as to product a better product in the future.
Often, if you are designing a product for a customer, the blueprint enables the customer to look at your design and confirm that the design is going in the desired direction or make notations where the design is not going in the desired direction.
But I Don’t Need a Blueprint!
People will frequently ask, why do I need a blueprint? Why can't I just start building what I need, I know what it looks like and how it should work, and I don't need a blueprint to follow in making it. That concern is easily answered by the following:
(1) Trying to design on the fly, so to speak, runs the risk of producing a flawed product. By not having a blueprint, you make mistakes and oftentimes you do not recognize these errors until you have gone too far with the construction of the project and undoing the work would be time consuming not to mention making you look foolish.
(2) Creating a blueprint forces you to look at the big picture, see the interaction of the various components and make sure it fits together.
Some people will say they do not need a blueprint, because they have made this product so many times that a blueprint just slows them down. Just keep in mind that the individual working from memory (no blueprint) has some form of experience on his side just like knowing your prayers without having to use a prayer card all the time. But that approach can lead to sloppy behavior, and lack of attention to detail.
So What Else Does a Blueprint Do?
(1) Complicated projects have multiple blueprints which each address the various sub-systems and each of these sub-systems must be coordinated with the overall project so that everything works together.
(2) Someone must review all of the blueprints to be sure all the various systems work together.
(3) Blueprints also help control cost. There is less waste when the whole picture is viewed together, that saves money, time and effort. Bad blueprints or no blueprints will waste money or cost money down the road when they try to build the product.
(4) Creating a blueprint also helps you, the designer identify pitfalls or problem areas. Something like designing a widget part "A" and you find our you need to modify your design for widget part "B" so they will function together. Without careful attention to detail, this non fit of "A" and "B" would not be discovered until it was too late or too costly to fix.
Another blueprint problem is a territorial dispute. Two people will say they do not need a blueprint, that they can do a better job of making the part. Each person will try to introduce their own personality into the project, thereby each producing dis-similar products. Now you have lost that "interchangeability" of parts. See what pride does to a product. A blueprint is in and of itself a humbling experience. A blueprint is created for the greater good of the whole, not for a piece of the whole to be elevated above the rest.
Do You Have a Family Blueprint? Do You Need a Family Blueprint?
It is quite likely that you somehow “sense” the answer to the above questions. Most families do have a blueprint when it comes to finances (we call that ‘blueprint’ a “budget”). They have a food and nutrition ‘blueprint’ (we call that their “regular shopping list”). They also have a physical health ‘blueprint’ whereby they choose their insurance plan and the health care professionals they wish to use. They also have a social ‘blueprint’, whereby they more or less have mapped-out what their annual social activities and entertainment will be—always allowing for tweaking here and there. They have an educational ‘blueprint’, whereby they choose what form of education their children will receive—public, private, Catholic or non-Catholic schools.
Yet when it comes to a spiritual blueprint—most, almost all, Catholic families fail miserably. Their only blueprint is trying to reach sanctity and Heaven on “a wing and a prayer”! There is no real planning; there is no methodical plan that has been researched, reflected upon, put down on paper, passed-by the spiritual director (nobody has one apart from a priest they confess to—but that is all they do, simply confess without a plan). It is perhaps the greatest anomaly and idiocy that you can imagine! They want to undertake the most difficult journey that man can make—from Earth to Heaven--“Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!” (Matthew 7:13-14)—yet they can’t be bothered to study the ‘road map’, learn about the skills required, nor familiarize themselves with the pitfalls, nor inclined to ask to directions and advice! Why is it that so few souls are saved? This is one of the reasons!
Our Lord said: “Learn of Me!” (Matthew 11:29). Our Lord is the ‘blueprint’ that we must follow! “And he said to all: ‘If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me!’” (Luke 9:23). We even have the classic spiritual ‘blueprint’ entitled The Imitation of Christ—and many other similar spiritual ‘road-map’ books—but very few even pick them up, never mind about systematically studying them—yet there is plenty of time for studying the television, the internet and social media! As for spiritual direction, just like buying gasoline, we look for the cheapest (easiest option), for, as Fr. Faber writes, we seek “to avoid anything which will restore animation to the conscience. We prefer to remain under chloroform for life. Thus we shrink from anything like vigorous spiritual direction. We suspect we shall be awakened, and driven, and made too good. Discretion―that is, the discretion of the blind conscience―tells us that this shrinking is wisdom and sagacity. We must, it says, be moderate in everything, but of all things amazingly moderate in the love of God! So in hearing sermons, reading books, cultivating acquaintances, patronizing works of mercy, it draws back from everything that is likely to come too near or hit too hard” (Fr. Faber, Growth in Holiness). We seek out the best affordable doctors, teachers, coaches, music teachers, tutors, etc. for our family, but when it comes to seeking a ‘coach’ or ‘teacher’ or ‘tutor’ for the spiritual life, we just can’t be bothered—even though it wouldn’t even cost us a dollar!
To souls with such an attitude, Our Lord says, as He did to the well-meaning but hypocritical Pharisees: “Can the blind lead the blind? Do they not both fall into the ditch? … Let them alone! They are blind, and leaders of the blind! And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the pit!” (Luke 6:39; Matthew 15:14). That is how so many families fall into “the pit”--“For many are called, but few are chosen!” (Matthew 22:14). “Seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand!” (Matthew 13:13). “Hear, O foolish people, and without understanding: who have eyes, and see not: and ears, and hear not!” (Jeremias 5:21).
Mary the Blueprint for Our Age
St. Louis de Montfort calls Mary the mold (living blueprint) into which we cast ourselves to be formed into a perfect imitation of Christ: “Mary is a holy place, and the holy of holies where saints are formed and molded. Take notice, if you please, that I say the saints are molded in Mary. There is a great difference between making a figure in relief by blows of hammer and chisel, and making a figure by throwing it into a mold. Statuaries and sculptors labor much to make figures in the first manner; but to make them in the second manner, they work little and do their work quickly. St. Augustine calls our Blessed Lady ‘the mold of God’―the mold fit to cast and mold gods. He who is cast in this mold is presently formed and molded in Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ in him. At a slight expense and in a short time he will become God, because he has been cast in the same mold which has formed a God.
“It seems to me that I can very aptly compare directors and devout persons, who wish to form Jesus Christ in themselves or others, to sculptors who trust in their own professional skill, ingenuity or art, and so give an infinity of hammering and chiseling to a hard stone or a piece of badly polished wood, to make an image of Jesus Christ out of it. Sometimes they do not succeed in giving anything like the natural expression of Jesus, either from having no knowledge or experience of the Person of Jesus, or from some blow awkwardly given, which has spoiled the work [this is the case of most families—they have no knowledge or experience, often because of indifference or sloth in learning]. But those who embrace the secret of grace which I am revealing to them I may rightly compare to founders and casters who have discovered the beautiful mold of Mary, where Jesus was naturally and divinely formed; and without trusting in their own skill, but only in the goodness of the mold, they cast themselves and lose themselves in Mary, to become the faithful portraits of Jesus Christ. Oh, beautiful and true comparison! But who will comprehend it? I desire that you may, my dear brother. But remember that we cast in a mold only what is melted and liquid; that is to say, you must destroy and melt down in yourself the old Adam to become the new one in Mary. By this practice, faithfully observed, you will give Jesus more glory in a month than by any other practice, however difficult, in many years” (St. Louis de Montfort. True Devotion to Mary, §219 to §222).
Our Lady confirms that she is the “blueprint” for our age when she says: “Pray the Rosary every day in honor of Our Lady of the Rosary, in order to obtain peace for the world and the end of the war, because only she can help you!” (Fatima, July 13th, 1917) and “Pray very much the prayers of the Rosary! I alone am able still to save you from the calamities which approach. Those who place their confidence in me will be saved!” (Akita, October 13th, 1973). To which Sr. Lucia of Fatima added in 1957: “Prayer and sacrifice are the two means to save the world. As for the Holy Rosary, Father, in these last times in which we are living, the Blessed Virgin has given a new efficacy to the praying of the Holy Rosary. This in such a way that there is no problem that cannot be resolved by praying the Rosary, no matter how difficult it is ― be it temporal or above all spiritual ― in the spiritual life of each of us, or the lives of our families, be they our families in the world or Religious Communities, or even in the lives of peoples and nations. I repeat, there is no problem, as difficult as it may be, that we cannot resolve at this time by praying the Holy Rosary. With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves, sanctify ourselves, console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls. Then, there is devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Most Holy Mother, holding her as the seat of mercy, goodness and pardon and the sure door to enter Heaven.”
Article 4
At the Heart of the Family
At the Heart of the Family
Who is the "King of Your Castle"?
You have probably heard of the expressions: “A man's home is his castle!” and “A man is king of his own castle!”― meaning that people enjoy the position of rulers in their own homes, that one can do whatever one wants to in one's own home, and that others have no right to enter without the householder's permission. It is a proverbial expression that illustrates the principle of individual privacy, which is/was fundamental to the American system of government. In this regard, the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution — part of the Bill of Rights — prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures.” The legal doctrine “A man's home is his castle” is reflected in this phrase from the Bill of Rights: “The right of the people to be secure in their ... houses ... against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated.”
The Family is a “microcosm” (small version) of the “macrocosm” (large version) of society. The Family is smallest of societies and, on the secular level, it is the “building-block” of larger societies—the village, town, city, county, state, nation and the world. The Family is also the “building-block” for the Mystical Body of Christ—the Catholic Church. Some like to label the Family as being a “domestic church”—which, to a certain extent, is true. For St. Paul speaks even speaks of each Christian being a “temple of God”—so, a church of God. “"Know you not, that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? … Know you not, that your members are the temple of the Holy Ghost―Who is in you, Whom you have from God―and you are not your own?” (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19). This very telling quote indicates to us that we are not alone—even in the castle of our own soul—and that God dwells there with us, providing that we are in state of sanctifying grace and not mortal sin. Our Lord also speaks of the body as a “temple” or a church, when He speaks of destroying the temple, which St. John explains: “But he spoke of the temple of His body” (John 2:21). Our Lord also alludes to the same truth when He says: “The Kingdom of God is within you!” (Luke 17:21). All of this throws a different light upon the phrase: “A man's home is his castle.”
God wants to live in that “castle” and make it part of His “kingdom” by making Himself “King” of your castle! Not only does He want to make it part of His Kingdom, He wants to live in your castle all the time! “Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock. If any man shall hear My voice, and open to Me the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with Me” (Apocalypse 3:20). “If any one loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him, and will make our abode with him” (John 14:23).
An individual person is not a “society”—but a mere “building-block” for the smallest society—the Family. When God made Adam—He said: “It is not good for man to be alone! Let us make him a help like unto himself!” (Genesis 2:18) and so God made Eve. Notice those words of God--“Let us make…”―the plural, “us”, signifies that even God Himself was not alone, but lived in a society of sorts—the Holy Trinity, which is three Persons in one God, which we could very loosely state as being “three Persons in one Divine Family.”
Just as God said of Adam—““It is not good for man to be alone!” (Genesis 2:18)—neither is it good for man to be without God! God needs to be part of the Family! In fact, God is the true Father and Parent of each family! The Catechism asks: “Who made you?” and we reply: “God made me!” The Catechism then asks: “Why did God make you?” and we duly respond: “God made me to know, love and serve Him in this life so that I can be happy with Him in the next life!” God made you—you did not make yourself! “Know ye that the Lord, He is God! He made us, and not we ourselves! We are His people and the sheep of His pasture!” (Psalm 99:3). In fact, the ‘castle’ that we live in belongs to HIM—it was made with the materials that HE created; it is built on land that HE ultimately owns because HE created it; it is furnished with things made from the raw materials that HE has created; we breath HIS air, we drink HIS water, we eat food that HE created and that HE grows with HIS sunlight, HIS rain, HIS air, etc. The list is endless! We are less our own than we imagine ourselves to be! Truly the words of Our Lord need to be better contemplated: “Without Me, you can do nothing!” (John 15:5). “What hast thou that thou hast not received? And if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?” (1 Corinthians 4:7).
We Have Dethroned the True King of Our Castle
The truth of the matter is that we have dethroned the real King of our ‘castle’—it is God, especially in the person of Christ the King, that should be reigning in our families. It is Christ the High Priest that should be forming our families by being at the very heart of them: “Christ, being come a high priest of the good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hand, that is, not of this creation” (Hebrews 9:11).
Yet just as legal doctrine, from the Bill of Rights―“The right of the people to be secure in their ... houses ... against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated”―reflects that “a man's home is his castle”, so too do we wish to be independent from God in our families (to a certain degree) and we don’t want Him living with us, because we are afraid that He will “cramp our style” and just be one big “kill-joy”! “The kings of the Earth stood up, and the princes met together, against the Lord and against his Christ, saying: ‘Let us break Their bonds asunder and let us cast away Their yoke from us!’” (Psalm 2:2-3). We do not want a TOTAL reign of Christ in our homes and families—that is too much! We want a “part-time” King, a “visiting” King, not a “resident” King.
In the Consecration of a Catholic Family and Home to the Sacred Heart of Jesus―according to the formula approved by Pope St. Pius X, on May 19th, 1908―we say: “O Sacred Heart of Jesus, You made known to St. Margaret Mary Your desire of being King in Christian families. We today wish to proclaim Your most complete kingly rule over our own family. We want to live in the future with Your life. We want to cause to flourish in our midst those virtues to which You have promised peace here below. We want to banish far from us the spirit of the world which You have cursed. You shall be King over our minds in the simplicity of our Faith, and over our hearts by the wholehearted love with which they shall burn for You, the flame of which we will keep alive by the frequent reception of Your divine Eucharist. Be so kind, O divine Heart, as to preside over our gatherings, to bless our enterprises, both spiritual and temporal, to dispel our cares, to sanctify our joys, and to alleviate our sufferings…etc.”
The original English reads a little more solemnly: “O Sacred Heart of Jesus, Who didst make known, to St. Margaret Mary, Thine ardent desire to reign over Christian families! Behold us assembled here today to proclaim Thine absolute dominion over our home. Henceforth we propose to lead a life like unto Thine, so that amongst us may flourish the virtues for which Thou didst promise peace on Earth, and, for this end, we will banish from our midst the spirit of the world which Thou dost abhor so much. Thou wilt reign over our understanding by the simplicity of our Faith. Thou wilt reign over our hearts by an ardent love for Thee; and may the flame of this love be ever kept burning in our hearts by the frequent reception of the Holy Eucharist. Deign, O Divine Heart, to preside over our meetings, to bless our undertakings, both spiritual and temporal, to banish all worry and care, to sanctify our joys, and soothe our sorrows…etc.”
When we look at the meaning of the words in the above text of consecration and then compare that to the way our families live-out their lives, then we are likely to see quite a discrepancy or separation between what is said and what is done! The words of Our Lord spring to mind: “Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me!’” (Mark 7:6).
We say: “We today wish to proclaim Your most complete kingly dominion over our own family … Behold us assembled here today to proclaim Thine absolute dominion over our home!”—but, in reality, that “absolute dominion” or “complete kingly rule” is not very absolute and not very complete! For many Catholics, it is not even a “part-time rule”—as they only half-wear their Faith on their sleeves on Sundays and live like pagans come Mondays! They bless their God on Sunday and then curse their neighbor come Monday! During the week they spend more time in the bathroom than they do in prayer!
Let Charity Reign—Let God Reign
As for thinking about God reigning in the home—what is God? “God is charity!” (1 John 4:8). Does charity really reign in the home? At a stretch of the imagination, perhaps it reigns among family members (but that is a big stretch of the imagination). As regards charity to those outside the family, the words of the “King” fall mostly on deaf ears: “You have heard that it hath been said: ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thy enemy!’ But I say to you, ‘Love your enemies! Do good to them that hate you! And pray for them that persecute and calumniate you!’ so that you may be the children of your Father Who is in heaven, Who maketh His sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust. For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? Do not even the publicans this? And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this? Therefore, be you perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect!” (Matthew 5:43-48). “If you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences. But if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences! … Then came Peter unto him and said: ‘Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him?’ Till seven times? Jesus said to him: ‘I say not to thee, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times!’” (Matthew 6:14-15; 18:21-22).
Conditions of Forgiveness
However, when Our Lord speaks of forgiving "seventy times seven times", it presumes that the one who needs forgiving is SORRY for what they have done! As in the Sacrament of Confession—there have to be certain conditions that are met for the Sacrament to forgive the penitent. There are five essential conditions that must be present for the Sacrament "to work", so to speak. (1) You have to make a serious, not superficial, examination of conscience; (2) You have to be sorry for your sins—a fear of God's punishments in this life and in Hell is the minimal acceptable sorrow, but a sorrow based on love and having offended someone you love, is even better; (3) You must have a FIRM (not vague) purpose of amendment—meaning that you make plans on how to avoid that/those sin(s) in the future, rather than vaguely thinking: "O I should really stop doing this!"; (4) You must truthfully—without "fudging", masking, "watering-down", vaguely mentioning, twisting or misrepresenting—confess your sins to the priest; (5) You must accept the penance (punishment and/or reparation) that the priest imposes upon you. The omission, neglect of, refusal of any these conditions seriously risks the integrity of your confession and leads to an invalid, sacrilegious confession.
There are some pointers from this that we can take in fulfilling Our Lord's command to forgive "seventy times seven times"
First of all, the guilty party must be sorry and not "lip-sorry" but "heart-sorry"—as Our Lord complains: “Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me!’” (Mark 7:6). Hypocritical sorrow deserves no forgiveness, the sorrow has to be sincere. "Lip-sorrow" must become "heart-sorrow" for forgiveness.
Secondly, as in confession, there has to be a firm purpose of amendment and not just a vague purpose. Some talk has to take place about how this is going to be avoided in the future. This shows a sincere desire to change and amend. If there is "heart-sorrow" present, then this is a natural consequence of it. If the sorrow is merely hypocritical "lip-sorrow", then there will be no real desire and no real efforts or plans made to avoid repeating the sin against you or others. Plans can go wrong, human weakness and frailty are always lurking around the next corner. Forgiveness may be needed again. Yet there is no problem with that if the sorrow is sincere and plans for amendment are real and firm.
Thirdly, forgiveness does not imply no punishment. When God forgives, He still punishes what He has forgiven—unless our self-punishment is adequate and satisfies Him. That is why Purgatory exists—it is a place of paying unpaid "fines" and a place of purification for those who neglected to purify themselves here below. The imposition of a punishment on the offender is a great help and aid in taking and making a firm purpose to amend and planning effectively to avoid a relapse. If there was no punishment for the guilty person—with the mere "lip-sorrow" apology sufficing—then there would little incentive to avoid repeating that behavior in the future.
To Forgive is to "Forget"
Obviously, we cannot entirely forget what has be done to us or to others, but the “forgetting” of the offense means not dredging-up that offense in the future and not treating the person badly in the future (after an initial punishment, if they have not already punished themselves). There are some family members who cannot stop bringing-up past ‘forgiven’ sins time and time again—especially when an argument or a repeat offense occurs. The priest, when he grants you God’s forgiveness in the Sacrament of Confession, is not allowed to treat you any differently after you confess your sins to the way he treated you before you confessed your sins.
If, as Holy Scripture says, “The Lord is gracious and merciful: patient and plenteous in mercy. The Lord is sweet to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works” (Psalm 144:8-9)—then let that also be seen in the family. Let the reign of God in the family also be the reign of charity and mercy in the family.
You have probably heard of the expressions: “A man's home is his castle!” and “A man is king of his own castle!”― meaning that people enjoy the position of rulers in their own homes, that one can do whatever one wants to in one's own home, and that others have no right to enter without the householder's permission. It is a proverbial expression that illustrates the principle of individual privacy, which is/was fundamental to the American system of government. In this regard, the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution — part of the Bill of Rights — prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures.” The legal doctrine “A man's home is his castle” is reflected in this phrase from the Bill of Rights: “The right of the people to be secure in their ... houses ... against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated.”
The Family is a “microcosm” (small version) of the “macrocosm” (large version) of society. The Family is smallest of societies and, on the secular level, it is the “building-block” of larger societies—the village, town, city, county, state, nation and the world. The Family is also the “building-block” for the Mystical Body of Christ—the Catholic Church. Some like to label the Family as being a “domestic church”—which, to a certain extent, is true. For St. Paul speaks even speaks of each Christian being a “temple of God”—so, a church of God. “"Know you not, that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? … Know you not, that your members are the temple of the Holy Ghost―Who is in you, Whom you have from God―and you are not your own?” (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19). This very telling quote indicates to us that we are not alone—even in the castle of our own soul—and that God dwells there with us, providing that we are in state of sanctifying grace and not mortal sin. Our Lord also speaks of the body as a “temple” or a church, when He speaks of destroying the temple, which St. John explains: “But he spoke of the temple of His body” (John 2:21). Our Lord also alludes to the same truth when He says: “The Kingdom of God is within you!” (Luke 17:21). All of this throws a different light upon the phrase: “A man's home is his castle.”
God wants to live in that “castle” and make it part of His “kingdom” by making Himself “King” of your castle! Not only does He want to make it part of His Kingdom, He wants to live in your castle all the time! “Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock. If any man shall hear My voice, and open to Me the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with Me” (Apocalypse 3:20). “If any one loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him, and will make our abode with him” (John 14:23).
An individual person is not a “society”—but a mere “building-block” for the smallest society—the Family. When God made Adam—He said: “It is not good for man to be alone! Let us make him a help like unto himself!” (Genesis 2:18) and so God made Eve. Notice those words of God--“Let us make…”―the plural, “us”, signifies that even God Himself was not alone, but lived in a society of sorts—the Holy Trinity, which is three Persons in one God, which we could very loosely state as being “three Persons in one Divine Family.”
Just as God said of Adam—““It is not good for man to be alone!” (Genesis 2:18)—neither is it good for man to be without God! God needs to be part of the Family! In fact, God is the true Father and Parent of each family! The Catechism asks: “Who made you?” and we reply: “God made me!” The Catechism then asks: “Why did God make you?” and we duly respond: “God made me to know, love and serve Him in this life so that I can be happy with Him in the next life!” God made you—you did not make yourself! “Know ye that the Lord, He is God! He made us, and not we ourselves! We are His people and the sheep of His pasture!” (Psalm 99:3). In fact, the ‘castle’ that we live in belongs to HIM—it was made with the materials that HE created; it is built on land that HE ultimately owns because HE created it; it is furnished with things made from the raw materials that HE has created; we breath HIS air, we drink HIS water, we eat food that HE created and that HE grows with HIS sunlight, HIS rain, HIS air, etc. The list is endless! We are less our own than we imagine ourselves to be! Truly the words of Our Lord need to be better contemplated: “Without Me, you can do nothing!” (John 15:5). “What hast thou that thou hast not received? And if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?” (1 Corinthians 4:7).
We Have Dethroned the True King of Our Castle
The truth of the matter is that we have dethroned the real King of our ‘castle’—it is God, especially in the person of Christ the King, that should be reigning in our families. It is Christ the High Priest that should be forming our families by being at the very heart of them: “Christ, being come a high priest of the good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hand, that is, not of this creation” (Hebrews 9:11).
Yet just as legal doctrine, from the Bill of Rights―“The right of the people to be secure in their ... houses ... against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated”―reflects that “a man's home is his castle”, so too do we wish to be independent from God in our families (to a certain degree) and we don’t want Him living with us, because we are afraid that He will “cramp our style” and just be one big “kill-joy”! “The kings of the Earth stood up, and the princes met together, against the Lord and against his Christ, saying: ‘Let us break Their bonds asunder and let us cast away Their yoke from us!’” (Psalm 2:2-3). We do not want a TOTAL reign of Christ in our homes and families—that is too much! We want a “part-time” King, a “visiting” King, not a “resident” King.
In the Consecration of a Catholic Family and Home to the Sacred Heart of Jesus―according to the formula approved by Pope St. Pius X, on May 19th, 1908―we say: “O Sacred Heart of Jesus, You made known to St. Margaret Mary Your desire of being King in Christian families. We today wish to proclaim Your most complete kingly rule over our own family. We want to live in the future with Your life. We want to cause to flourish in our midst those virtues to which You have promised peace here below. We want to banish far from us the spirit of the world which You have cursed. You shall be King over our minds in the simplicity of our Faith, and over our hearts by the wholehearted love with which they shall burn for You, the flame of which we will keep alive by the frequent reception of Your divine Eucharist. Be so kind, O divine Heart, as to preside over our gatherings, to bless our enterprises, both spiritual and temporal, to dispel our cares, to sanctify our joys, and to alleviate our sufferings…etc.”
The original English reads a little more solemnly: “O Sacred Heart of Jesus, Who didst make known, to St. Margaret Mary, Thine ardent desire to reign over Christian families! Behold us assembled here today to proclaim Thine absolute dominion over our home. Henceforth we propose to lead a life like unto Thine, so that amongst us may flourish the virtues for which Thou didst promise peace on Earth, and, for this end, we will banish from our midst the spirit of the world which Thou dost abhor so much. Thou wilt reign over our understanding by the simplicity of our Faith. Thou wilt reign over our hearts by an ardent love for Thee; and may the flame of this love be ever kept burning in our hearts by the frequent reception of the Holy Eucharist. Deign, O Divine Heart, to preside over our meetings, to bless our undertakings, both spiritual and temporal, to banish all worry and care, to sanctify our joys, and soothe our sorrows…etc.”
When we look at the meaning of the words in the above text of consecration and then compare that to the way our families live-out their lives, then we are likely to see quite a discrepancy or separation between what is said and what is done! The words of Our Lord spring to mind: “Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me!’” (Mark 7:6).
We say: “We today wish to proclaim Your most complete kingly dominion over our own family … Behold us assembled here today to proclaim Thine absolute dominion over our home!”—but, in reality, that “absolute dominion” or “complete kingly rule” is not very absolute and not very complete! For many Catholics, it is not even a “part-time rule”—as they only half-wear their Faith on their sleeves on Sundays and live like pagans come Mondays! They bless their God on Sunday and then curse their neighbor come Monday! During the week they spend more time in the bathroom than they do in prayer!
Let Charity Reign—Let God Reign
As for thinking about God reigning in the home—what is God? “God is charity!” (1 John 4:8). Does charity really reign in the home? At a stretch of the imagination, perhaps it reigns among family members (but that is a big stretch of the imagination). As regards charity to those outside the family, the words of the “King” fall mostly on deaf ears: “You have heard that it hath been said: ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thy enemy!’ But I say to you, ‘Love your enemies! Do good to them that hate you! And pray for them that persecute and calumniate you!’ so that you may be the children of your Father Who is in heaven, Who maketh His sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust. For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? Do not even the publicans this? And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this? Therefore, be you perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect!” (Matthew 5:43-48). “If you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences. But if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences! … Then came Peter unto him and said: ‘Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him?’ Till seven times? Jesus said to him: ‘I say not to thee, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times!’” (Matthew 6:14-15; 18:21-22).
Conditions of Forgiveness
However, when Our Lord speaks of forgiving "seventy times seven times", it presumes that the one who needs forgiving is SORRY for what they have done! As in the Sacrament of Confession—there have to be certain conditions that are met for the Sacrament to forgive the penitent. There are five essential conditions that must be present for the Sacrament "to work", so to speak. (1) You have to make a serious, not superficial, examination of conscience; (2) You have to be sorry for your sins—a fear of God's punishments in this life and in Hell is the minimal acceptable sorrow, but a sorrow based on love and having offended someone you love, is even better; (3) You must have a FIRM (not vague) purpose of amendment—meaning that you make plans on how to avoid that/those sin(s) in the future, rather than vaguely thinking: "O I should really stop doing this!"; (4) You must truthfully—without "fudging", masking, "watering-down", vaguely mentioning, twisting or misrepresenting—confess your sins to the priest; (5) You must accept the penance (punishment and/or reparation) that the priest imposes upon you. The omission, neglect of, refusal of any these conditions seriously risks the integrity of your confession and leads to an invalid, sacrilegious confession.
There are some pointers from this that we can take in fulfilling Our Lord's command to forgive "seventy times seven times"
First of all, the guilty party must be sorry and not "lip-sorry" but "heart-sorry"—as Our Lord complains: “Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me!’” (Mark 7:6). Hypocritical sorrow deserves no forgiveness, the sorrow has to be sincere. "Lip-sorrow" must become "heart-sorrow" for forgiveness.
Secondly, as in confession, there has to be a firm purpose of amendment and not just a vague purpose. Some talk has to take place about how this is going to be avoided in the future. This shows a sincere desire to change and amend. If there is "heart-sorrow" present, then this is a natural consequence of it. If the sorrow is merely hypocritical "lip-sorrow", then there will be no real desire and no real efforts or plans made to avoid repeating the sin against you or others. Plans can go wrong, human weakness and frailty are always lurking around the next corner. Forgiveness may be needed again. Yet there is no problem with that if the sorrow is sincere and plans for amendment are real and firm.
Thirdly, forgiveness does not imply no punishment. When God forgives, He still punishes what He has forgiven—unless our self-punishment is adequate and satisfies Him. That is why Purgatory exists—it is a place of paying unpaid "fines" and a place of purification for those who neglected to purify themselves here below. The imposition of a punishment on the offender is a great help and aid in taking and making a firm purpose to amend and planning effectively to avoid a relapse. If there was no punishment for the guilty person—with the mere "lip-sorrow" apology sufficing—then there would little incentive to avoid repeating that behavior in the future.
To Forgive is to "Forget"
Obviously, we cannot entirely forget what has be done to us or to others, but the “forgetting” of the offense means not dredging-up that offense in the future and not treating the person badly in the future (after an initial punishment, if they have not already punished themselves). There are some family members who cannot stop bringing-up past ‘forgiven’ sins time and time again—especially when an argument or a repeat offense occurs. The priest, when he grants you God’s forgiveness in the Sacrament of Confession, is not allowed to treat you any differently after you confess your sins to the way he treated you before you confessed your sins.
If, as Holy Scripture says, “The Lord is gracious and merciful: patient and plenteous in mercy. The Lord is sweet to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works” (Psalm 144:8-9)—then let that also be seen in the family. Let the reign of God in the family also be the reign of charity and mercy in the family.
Article 5
The Lack of Effect and Neglect of Correction Within the Family
The Lack of Effect and Neglect of Correction Within the Family
The Fatality of Not Correcting
You are driving along the interstate and look out the side window at a car that is passing, or, worse still, you are trying to reach over to the passenger side to pull your phone out your bag/purse/pocket, or even worse, you are trying to text while you are driving. The result is that your car veers slightly off the desired path. If you fail to correct that slight change of direction immediately, then you are endangering your life and the lives of any passengers you may have in the car.
As one doctor writes: “Toddlers are equally capable of ingesting liquids or pills. Children younger than 2 years of age, as a whole, are unable to discriminate safe from unsafe liquids, particularly if the agent is stored in a recognized container (i.e., kerosene or gasoline in a soda bottle). Toddlers fail to recognize the suitability of the drink, and a toxic volume may be consumed before taste aversion leads to discontinuing the drink. A 2-year-old child can equally mistake a medication for an edible ingredient.” If you see your toddler about to drink some toxic liquid and fail to correct the toddler immediately, you are endangering the health, perhaps even the life, of the child.
In April of 1912, the captain and crew of the Titanic failed to take notice of the ‘corrections’ sent to them by other ships in the iceberg belt [read more here] and we all know of the terrible consequences.
More recently, almost 100 years later, a mega-earthquake triggered a catastrophic tsunami in Japan in 2011, that killed 15,891 people. It also set off a disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, where three reactors melted down, forcing the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of residents within a 12-mile radius of the complex. Four years later, tens of thousands of people are still unable to return to their homes. Investigations concluded that the nuclear disaster could have been prevented. Investigators stated that: “Bureaucratic and professional stove-piping made nuclear officials unwilling to take advice from experts outside of the field.”
Even in lesser fields―such as spelling and grammar—a failure to correct can lead to grotesque forms of spelling and writing. If we haven’t learned read, write and enunciate correctly, then it can lead to embarrassing situations.
All of this is a self-evident lesson which is universally accepted and agreed upon. Yet when it comes to the spiritual sphere, why do we not follow the same principle?
God Commands Correction
Holy Scripture is very clear on the matter of correction: “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son: and if he commit any iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men” (2 Kings 7:14). “What son is there, whom the father doth not correct?” (Hebrews 12:7). “Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die” (Proverbs 23:13). “By his inclinations a child is known, if his works be clean and right” (Proverbs 20:11). “Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, and the rod of correction shall drive it away” (Proverbs 22:15). “He that spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him, correcteth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24). “The rod and reproof give wisdom: but the child that is left to his own will, bringeth his mother to shame” (Proverbs 29:15). “A horse not broken becometh stubborn, and a child left to himself will become headstrong” (Ecclesiasticus 30:8). “A young man according to his way, even when he is old he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6). “He that loveth his son, frequently chastiseth him, that he may rejoice in his latter end” (Ecclesiasticus 30:1).
“Children, hear the judgment of your father, and so do that you may be saved” (Ecclesiasticus 3:2). “Now therefore, ye children, hear me! Blessed are they that keep my ways!” (Proverbs 8:32). “Listen, therefore, my children, to your father! Serve the Lord in truth, and seek to do the things that please Him!” (Tobias 14:10). “By what doth a young man correct his way? By observing Thy words [O Lord]” (Psalm 118:9). “He also shall open their ear, to correct them: and shall speak, that they may return from iniquity” (Job 36:10). “I will not consume thee, but I will correct thee in judgment, neither will I spare thee as if thou wert innocent” (Jeremias 46:28).
Following the Counsel of the Lord
“The Son of man is come to save that which was lost. What think you? If a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them should go astray: doth he not leave the ninety-nine in the mountains, and go to seek that which is gone astray? And if it so be that he find it: Amen I say to you, he rejoiceth more for that, than for the ninety-nine that went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father, Who is in Heaven, that one of these little ones should perish. But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican” (Matthew 18:11-17).
Rebuke, Repent, Forgive
Immediately after Jesus had spoken the above words,“Then came Peter unto him and said: ‘Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him? Till seven times?’ Jesus saith to him: ‘I say not to thee, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times!’” (Matthew 18:21-22). “If thy brother sin against thee, reprove him: and if he do penance, forgive him. And if he sin against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day be converted unto thee, saying, ‘I repent!― forgive him” (Luke 17:3-4).
The Sweet-Toothed Liberal
Our present day sees a swarm of sweet-toothed Liberals buzzing around threateningly denouncing the need for correction. They say that everyone has a right to act as they wish and should follow their own conscience. We have not right to judge others! These advocates of “sweetness” often quote the saint who has become the unofficial patron saint of Liberals—St. Francis de Sales—though I am sure he would be horrified and disgusted at the thought. The only quote—or the most frequent quote—of St. Francis de Sales, that the Liberals love to throw around is: “A spoon full of honey attracts more flies than a barrel full of vinegar”―which these sweet-toothed Liberals apply to winning-over sinners. However, the whole notion of “winning-over” sinners is to make them stop sinning—not to smile sweetly and compassionately while they continue sinning! That would be like St. Peter—whom Our Lord called to be a “fisher of men”—catching fish, only to throw them back into to water from which he had just pulled them out!
Was St. Francis de Sales Sweet-Toothed and Honeyed?
Acquiescing to the preference of Liberals for St. Francis de Sales, let us use St. Francis de Sales to prove the truth—just as you would use what the Protestants like and accept—the Bible—in proving the truths of the Catholic Church. Here are some other things that “sweet” and “gentle” St. Francis de Sales has to say about “honey” and “sin”.
“Friendship demands very close correspondence between those who love one another, otherwise it can never take root or continue … We should love him notwithstanding his faults, but without loving those faults … We should bear with our friend's infirmities, but we should not encourage them, much less copy them … Of course I am speaking of imperfections only, for, as regards sins, we must neither imitate or tolerate these in our friends [and since we want to be friends with our children, it includes them too]. That is but a sorry friendship which would see a friend perish, and not try to save him; would watch him dying of an abscess, without daring to handle the knife of correction which would save him. True and living friendship cannot thrive amid sin. Friendship will banish a casual sin by brotherly correction, but if the sin be persistent, friendship dies out―it can only live in a pure atmosphere. Much less can true friendship ever lead any one into sin; our friend becomes an enemy if he seeks to do so, and deserves to lose our friendship, and there is no surer proof of the hollowness of friendship than its profession between evil-doers. If we love a sinful person, our friendship will be sinful too; it will be like those to whom it is given” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapter 22).
“It is a duty to resist evil and to repress the faults of those for whom we are responsible, steadily [not just once, but continually, like a doctor continually and daily applies medicine until the cure is effected] and firmly, but gently and quietly. Correction given in anger, however tempered by reason, never has so much effect as that which is given altogether without anger … When reason prevails―and administers reproof, correction, and punishment in a calm spirit―although it be strict, every one approves and is content. But if reason be hindered by anger and vexation, there will be more fear than love, and reason itself will be despised and resisted” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapter 8).
“Watch a bee hovering over the mountain thyme―the juices it gathers are bitter, but the bee turns them all to honey―and so tells the worldling, that though the soul finds bitter herbs along its path, they are all turned to sweetness and pleasantness as it treads―as the martyrs have counted fire, sword, and rack … Bear in mind that the bee while making its honey lives upon a bitter food: and in like manner we can never make acts of gentleness and patience, better than while eating the bread of bitterness, and enduring hardness. The best honey is that made from thyme, a small and bitter herb” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 1, Chapter 3; Part 3, Chapter 3).
“A certain kind of honey brought from Pontus is poisonous, being made from aconite, so that those who eat it lose their senses … Take notice that the honey of Heraclyum, which is so poisonous, altogether resembles that honey which is wholesome, and there is great danger of mistaking one for the other! … Poisonous honey from what is good―it is sweeter to the taste than ordinary honey, owing to the aconite infused … That honey confuses the sight, and confuses the judgment, so that men think themselves right while doing evil, and assume their excuses and pretexts to be valid reasoning … Lastly, this poisonous sweet honey leaves an exceeding bitter taste behind afterwards!” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapters 17 & 20).
As Holy Scripture says: “Correct your heart, which has indulged your child, letting him give way to pride, vanity, and ambition” [or other sins] (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapter 23).
Correct With Real Honey and Not Poisoned Honey
Likewise, we can pretend (or perhaps even sincerely believe) that we are being charitable and sweet by not correcting others and continually putting-up with their sins without taking sufficient and increasing measures to correct them. We think we are showing them charity—but, in reality, we are poisoning them. Our honey is poisoned! It seems to be “real” honey, but it is not—it is poisonous honey, a poisonous ‘charity’ that sounds like charity, seems like charity, but is not real charity.
The Trinity of the Corrector, the Correction and the Corrected
In any correction there are three essential things which much all work together for any correction to be successful. These are (1) the person doing correcting, (2) the correction that is being given, and (3) the person who is being corrected. All these three must be in harmony—easier said than done—for the correction to be successful and for a change to take place.
The person who is doing the correcting must know how to correct—like a driver must know how to drive, a soldier how to fight, a surgeon how to operate, a musician how to play his instrument, an artist how to paint, etc. There is good and bad way to correct; a right and wrong way to correct; a full or an incomplete correction; an effective and an ineffective way to correct. The person correcting must know what he/she is talking about. They must know all the required truths: the law of God, the morality of actions, the true facts of the case in question.
The correction must it must be in harmony with God’s will and God’s laws; it must be based on truth and logic, it must logically presented and understandable for the level of the person receiving it; it must be possible to accomplish; it must be non-sinful in the way it is presented and as regards the change it asks for.
The person being corrected must be humble enough to see their errors and accept truth—both the truth of God and natural truth. The person being corrected must be respected insofar as their person as a child of God, but their sin deserves no respect. For a person to stop sinning, several things need to take place. They must see their sin clearly, they must confess that sin sincerely—which means having what most people do not have—a firm purpose of amendment. They must also confess their sin and do some penance (reparation) for their sin. It is these factors that show that a person has a real sorrow for their sin. “Be sure always to entertain a hearty sorrow for the sins you confess, however small they are; as also a steadfast resolution to correct them in future … and make a firm resolution of amendment: it is a mere abuse to confess any sin whatever, be it mortal or venial, without intending to put it altogether away, that being the express object of confession” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 2, Chapter 19).
Liberalism—the Trojan Horse of Catholicism
Just as the Trojans managed to infiltrate the Greeks by leaving behind a charitable ‘gift’—the Trojan Horse—so too have Liberals infiltrated the once Traditional and Conservative Catholic Church. It is a virus that has spread everywhere—and when everyone is sick, then everyone seems to be ‘normal’! If we cannot clearly recognize the symptoms of Liberalism, then we will feel ‘normal’ and spiritually healthy! Here are some excellent passages from the book Liberalism is Sin by Fr. Salvany—you can get the book from TAN Books. An absolutely essential read for our Ultra-Liberal days, when even Traditionalist Catholics and Conservative Catholics are turning more and more Liberal. Most of the Conservative and Traditional Catholic world is rapidly increasing in Liberalism—especially the youth. The ultimate failure—besides a negligence in using the sources of grace (many Masses, Rosaries, Prayer, Penance and Sacrifices) to prevent the youth from being contaminated—it is also a failure to correct and correct effectively from the earliest days of childhood that has led to this tragedy. Here are a few extracts from the book, Liberalism Is A Sin, that deal with idea of correction and charity.
Liberalism is a Sin (Chapter 19—Charity & Liberalism)
All Liberals love sweetness, calm and gentleness—but often at the expense of fostering sin and allowing sin to fester. Liberals hate to correct and be corrected—that is why, in his book Liberalism is a Sin, in the chapter entitled “Charity and Liberalism”, Fr. Salvany writes:
“Narrow! Intolerant! Uncompromising! These are the insulting names hurled by Liberals of all degrees at Conservative Roman Catholics. Are not Liberals our neighbors like other men? Do we not owe to them the same charity we apply to others? Are not your vigorous denunciations—they say to us—harsh and uncharitable and in the very teeth of the teaching of Christianity, which is essentially a religion of love? Such is the accusation continually flung in our face. Let us see what its value is. Let us see all that the word “Charity” signifies.
The Catechism of the Council of Trent, that popular and most authoritative epitome of Catholic theology, gives us the most complete and succinct definition of charity; it is full of wisdom and philosophy. Charity is a supernatural virtue which induces us to love God above all things and our neighbors as ourselves for the love of God. Thus, after God we ought to love our neighbor as ourselves, and this not just in any way, but for the love of God and in obedience to His law. And now, what is it to love? To love is to wish good to him whom we love. To whom does charity command us to wish good? To our neighbor, that is to say, not to this or that man only, but to everyone. What is that good which true love wishes? First of all supernatural good, then goods of the natural order which are not incompatible with it. All this is included in the phrase “for the love of God.”
It follows, therefore, that we can love our neighbor when displeasing him, when opposing him, when causing him some material injury, and even, on certain occasions, when depriving him of life; in short, all is reduced to this: Whether in the instance where we displease, oppose, or humiliate him, it is or is not for his own good, or for the good of someone whose rights are superior to his, or simply for the greater service of God.
If it is shown that in displeasing or offending our neighbor we act for his good, it is evident that we love him, even when opposing or crossing him. The physician cauterizing his patient or cutting off his gangrened limb may nonetheless love him. When we correct the wicked by restraining or by punishing them, we do nonetheless love them. This is charity—and perfect charity.
It is often necessary to displease or offend one person, not for his own good, but to deliver another from the evil he is inflicting. It is then an obligation of charity to repel the unjust violence of the aggressor; one may inflict as much injury on the aggressor as is necessary for defense. Such would be the case should one see a highwayman attacking a traveler. In this instance, to kill, wound, or at least take such measures as to render the aggressor impotent, would be an act of true charity.
The good of all good is the divine Good, just as God is for all men the Neighbor of all neighbors. In consequence, the love due to a man, inasmuch as he is our neighbor, ought always to be subordinated to that which is due to our common Lord. For His love and in His service we must not hesitate to offend men. The degree of our offense towards men can only be measured by the degree of our obligation to Him. Charity is primarily the love of God, secondarily the love of our neighbor for God’s sake. To sacrifice the first is to abandon the latter. Therefore, to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a true act of charity. Not to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a sin.
Modern Liberalism reverses this order; it imposes a false notion of charity: our neighbor first, and, if at all, God afterwards. By its reiterated and trite accusations toward us of intolerance, it has succeeded in disconcerting even some staunch Catholics. But our rule is too plain and too concrete to admit of misconception. It is this: Sovereign Catholic inflexibility is sovereign Catholic charity.
This charity is practiced in relation to our neighbor when, in his own interest, he is crossed, humiliated, and chastised. It is practiced in relation to a third party when he is defended from the unjust aggression of another, as when he is protected from the contagion of error by unmasking its authors and abettors and showing them in their true light as iniquitous and pervert, by holding them up to the contempt, horror, and execration of all. It is practiced in relation to God when, for His glory and in His service, it becomes necessary to silence all human considerations, to trample under foot all human respect, to sacrifice all human interests—and even life itself—to attain this highest of all ends.
All this is Catholic inflexibility and inflexible Catholicity in the practice of that pure love which constitutes sovereign charity. The Saints are the types of this unswerving and sovereign fidelity to God, the heroes of charity and religion. Because in our times there are so few true inflexibles in the love of God, so also are there few uncompromisers in the order of charity. Liberal charity is condescending, affectionate, even tender in appearance, but at bottom it is an essential contempt for the true good of men, of the supreme interests of truth and [ultimately] of God. It is human self-love, usurping the throne of the Most High and demanding that worship which belongs to God alone.” (Fr. Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin, chapter 19: “Charity and Liberalism”).
Liberalism is a Sin (Chapters 18 & 28)
“Many Catholics, by far too naive, are perpetually seeking to pose as impartial … They are fearful of being considered narrow-minded and partial if they do not ‘give the devil his due’. In their flattery, they hope to show that it costs a Catholic nothing to recognize merit wherever it may be found; they imagine this to be a powerful means of attracting the enemy. Alas, the folly of the weaklings! They play a losing game! It is they who are insensibly attracted, not the enemy! They simply fly at the bait held out by the cunning fisher who satanically guides the destinies of Liberalism” (Fr. Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin, chapter 18: “Literature and Liberalism”).
“Liberalism may speak the language of charity, appealing to us from the tenderest side, and ask us to associate ourselves with it in the name of a common humanity. ‘Put aside all differences of creed and let us fraternize on the broader plane of brotherly love’ is often its most insidious appeal. Such instances are arising every day of our lives” (Fr. Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin, chapter 28).
The Honey-Bee Catholics Who End Up Being Stung
We live in a sweet and sugary world! A world where we compassionately smile at whatever is said and done! Teachers are now limited in how they can discipline their students. Parents risk the wrath of the Social Services for disciplining their children. Everybody’s self-esteem is placed above the esteem of God. Man is placed before God. Charity to man takes precedence over charity to God. Yet Holy Scripture commands otherwise: “And one of them, a doctor of the law, asking Him, tempting Him: ‘Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law?’ Jesus said to him: ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’” (Matthew 22:35-39). Fr. Salvany, in his book, Liberalism is a Sin, writes: “Modern Liberalism reverses this order; it imposes a false notion of charity: our neighbor first, and, if at all, God afterwards. By its reiterated and trite accusations toward us of intolerance, it has succeeded in disconcerting even some staunch Catholics.”
We change the language to avoid labeling people. We call homosexuals “gay” (happy) people. We call criminals “offenders”. We call fornicators and adulterers “lovers”. We call pornography “adult material”. We call lust “love”. We call sin “a fault”. The list goes on. We see children grossly misbehave, throw tantrums and wreck things while nobody dares to correct them—they just smile and say: “Oh isn’t he/she sweet! They’re just having an off-day!” Criminals sometimes come away looking like the victim! As Holy Scripture says: “Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter” (Isaias 5:20).
That is exactly where we are today—where evil is being called ‘good’, and true goodness is being called evil. It has become a “hate crime” to hate evil and it has become ‘virtuous’ to tolerate evil. “Be not deceived, God is not mocked! For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh, of the flesh also shall reap corruption” (Galatians 6:7-8). We are now afraid to correct for fear of being looked upon as being wrong. We just sit down, shut-up and don’t rock the boat! It is this vicious human respect that makes us accomplices in damning many souls—not least the souls of our own family! “But their children provoked Me, they walked not in My commandments, nor observed My judgments … and they violated My Sabbaths: and I threatened to pour out My indignation upon them and to accomplish My wrath in them” (Ezechiel 20:21). “Woe to you, apostate children, saith the Lord, that you would take counsel, and not of Me: and would begin a web, and not by My spirit, that you might add sin upon sin” (Isaias 30:1).
Our Lord Himself said: “Do not think that I came to send peace upon Earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on Earth? I tell you, no; but separation. For there shall be from henceforth five in one house divided: three against two, and two against three … For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household … He that loveth father or mother more than Me, is not worthy of Me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than Me, is not worthy of Me!” (Matthew 10:34-37; Luke 12:51-52). Parents and teachers, priests and bishops are not there primarily to be “buddy-buddy” with everyone under their charge, but to lead those under their charge to a greater knowledge, love and service of God. On many an occasion, many a person will not want to hear or do that. Our friendship and obedience to God comes before our friendship and accommodation of others.
“Thou shalt read the words of God’s law before all, in their hearing. And the people, being all assembled together, both men and women, children and strangers, that are within thy gates, that hearing they may learn, and fear the Lord your God, and keep, and fulfill all the words of His law. That their children, also, who now are ignorant, may hear and fear the Lord their God” (Deuteronomy 31:11-13).
“Thou shalt read the words of God’s law before all, in their hearing. And the people, being all assembled together, both men and women, children and strangers, that are within thy gates, that hearing they may learn, and fear the Lord your God, and keep, and fulfill all the words of His law. That their children, also, who now are ignorant, may hear and fear the Lord their God” (Deuteronomy 31:11-13).
You are driving along the interstate and look out the side window at a car that is passing, or, worse still, you are trying to reach over to the passenger side to pull your phone out your bag/purse/pocket, or even worse, you are trying to text while you are driving. The result is that your car veers slightly off the desired path. If you fail to correct that slight change of direction immediately, then you are endangering your life and the lives of any passengers you may have in the car.
As one doctor writes: “Toddlers are equally capable of ingesting liquids or pills. Children younger than 2 years of age, as a whole, are unable to discriminate safe from unsafe liquids, particularly if the agent is stored in a recognized container (i.e., kerosene or gasoline in a soda bottle). Toddlers fail to recognize the suitability of the drink, and a toxic volume may be consumed before taste aversion leads to discontinuing the drink. A 2-year-old child can equally mistake a medication for an edible ingredient.” If you see your toddler about to drink some toxic liquid and fail to correct the toddler immediately, you are endangering the health, perhaps even the life, of the child.
In April of 1912, the captain and crew of the Titanic failed to take notice of the ‘corrections’ sent to them by other ships in the iceberg belt [read more here] and we all know of the terrible consequences.
More recently, almost 100 years later, a mega-earthquake triggered a catastrophic tsunami in Japan in 2011, that killed 15,891 people. It also set off a disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, where three reactors melted down, forcing the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of residents within a 12-mile radius of the complex. Four years later, tens of thousands of people are still unable to return to their homes. Investigations concluded that the nuclear disaster could have been prevented. Investigators stated that: “Bureaucratic and professional stove-piping made nuclear officials unwilling to take advice from experts outside of the field.”
Even in lesser fields―such as spelling and grammar—a failure to correct can lead to grotesque forms of spelling and writing. If we haven’t learned read, write and enunciate correctly, then it can lead to embarrassing situations.
All of this is a self-evident lesson which is universally accepted and agreed upon. Yet when it comes to the spiritual sphere, why do we not follow the same principle?
God Commands Correction
Holy Scripture is very clear on the matter of correction: “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son: and if he commit any iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men” (2 Kings 7:14). “What son is there, whom the father doth not correct?” (Hebrews 12:7). “Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die” (Proverbs 23:13). “By his inclinations a child is known, if his works be clean and right” (Proverbs 20:11). “Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, and the rod of correction shall drive it away” (Proverbs 22:15). “He that spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him, correcteth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24). “The rod and reproof give wisdom: but the child that is left to his own will, bringeth his mother to shame” (Proverbs 29:15). “A horse not broken becometh stubborn, and a child left to himself will become headstrong” (Ecclesiasticus 30:8). “A young man according to his way, even when he is old he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6). “He that loveth his son, frequently chastiseth him, that he may rejoice in his latter end” (Ecclesiasticus 30:1).
“Children, hear the judgment of your father, and so do that you may be saved” (Ecclesiasticus 3:2). “Now therefore, ye children, hear me! Blessed are they that keep my ways!” (Proverbs 8:32). “Listen, therefore, my children, to your father! Serve the Lord in truth, and seek to do the things that please Him!” (Tobias 14:10). “By what doth a young man correct his way? By observing Thy words [O Lord]” (Psalm 118:9). “He also shall open their ear, to correct them: and shall speak, that they may return from iniquity” (Job 36:10). “I will not consume thee, but I will correct thee in judgment, neither will I spare thee as if thou wert innocent” (Jeremias 46:28).
Following the Counsel of the Lord
“The Son of man is come to save that which was lost. What think you? If a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them should go astray: doth he not leave the ninety-nine in the mountains, and go to seek that which is gone astray? And if it so be that he find it: Amen I say to you, he rejoiceth more for that, than for the ninety-nine that went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father, Who is in Heaven, that one of these little ones should perish. But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican” (Matthew 18:11-17).
Rebuke, Repent, Forgive
Immediately after Jesus had spoken the above words,“Then came Peter unto him and said: ‘Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him? Till seven times?’ Jesus saith to him: ‘I say not to thee, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times!’” (Matthew 18:21-22). “If thy brother sin against thee, reprove him: and if he do penance, forgive him. And if he sin against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day be converted unto thee, saying, ‘I repent!― forgive him” (Luke 17:3-4).
The Sweet-Toothed Liberal
Our present day sees a swarm of sweet-toothed Liberals buzzing around threateningly denouncing the need for correction. They say that everyone has a right to act as they wish and should follow their own conscience. We have not right to judge others! These advocates of “sweetness” often quote the saint who has become the unofficial patron saint of Liberals—St. Francis de Sales—though I am sure he would be horrified and disgusted at the thought. The only quote—or the most frequent quote—of St. Francis de Sales, that the Liberals love to throw around is: “A spoon full of honey attracts more flies than a barrel full of vinegar”―which these sweet-toothed Liberals apply to winning-over sinners. However, the whole notion of “winning-over” sinners is to make them stop sinning—not to smile sweetly and compassionately while they continue sinning! That would be like St. Peter—whom Our Lord called to be a “fisher of men”—catching fish, only to throw them back into to water from which he had just pulled them out!
Was St. Francis de Sales Sweet-Toothed and Honeyed?
Acquiescing to the preference of Liberals for St. Francis de Sales, let us use St. Francis de Sales to prove the truth—just as you would use what the Protestants like and accept—the Bible—in proving the truths of the Catholic Church. Here are some other things that “sweet” and “gentle” St. Francis de Sales has to say about “honey” and “sin”.
“Friendship demands very close correspondence between those who love one another, otherwise it can never take root or continue … We should love him notwithstanding his faults, but without loving those faults … We should bear with our friend's infirmities, but we should not encourage them, much less copy them … Of course I am speaking of imperfections only, for, as regards sins, we must neither imitate or tolerate these in our friends [and since we want to be friends with our children, it includes them too]. That is but a sorry friendship which would see a friend perish, and not try to save him; would watch him dying of an abscess, without daring to handle the knife of correction which would save him. True and living friendship cannot thrive amid sin. Friendship will banish a casual sin by brotherly correction, but if the sin be persistent, friendship dies out―it can only live in a pure atmosphere. Much less can true friendship ever lead any one into sin; our friend becomes an enemy if he seeks to do so, and deserves to lose our friendship, and there is no surer proof of the hollowness of friendship than its profession between evil-doers. If we love a sinful person, our friendship will be sinful too; it will be like those to whom it is given” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapter 22).
“It is a duty to resist evil and to repress the faults of those for whom we are responsible, steadily [not just once, but continually, like a doctor continually and daily applies medicine until the cure is effected] and firmly, but gently and quietly. Correction given in anger, however tempered by reason, never has so much effect as that which is given altogether without anger … When reason prevails―and administers reproof, correction, and punishment in a calm spirit―although it be strict, every one approves and is content. But if reason be hindered by anger and vexation, there will be more fear than love, and reason itself will be despised and resisted” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapter 8).
“Watch a bee hovering over the mountain thyme―the juices it gathers are bitter, but the bee turns them all to honey―and so tells the worldling, that though the soul finds bitter herbs along its path, they are all turned to sweetness and pleasantness as it treads―as the martyrs have counted fire, sword, and rack … Bear in mind that the bee while making its honey lives upon a bitter food: and in like manner we can never make acts of gentleness and patience, better than while eating the bread of bitterness, and enduring hardness. The best honey is that made from thyme, a small and bitter herb” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 1, Chapter 3; Part 3, Chapter 3).
“A certain kind of honey brought from Pontus is poisonous, being made from aconite, so that those who eat it lose their senses … Take notice that the honey of Heraclyum, which is so poisonous, altogether resembles that honey which is wholesome, and there is great danger of mistaking one for the other! … Poisonous honey from what is good―it is sweeter to the taste than ordinary honey, owing to the aconite infused … That honey confuses the sight, and confuses the judgment, so that men think themselves right while doing evil, and assume their excuses and pretexts to be valid reasoning … Lastly, this poisonous sweet honey leaves an exceeding bitter taste behind afterwards!” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapters 17 & 20).
As Holy Scripture says: “Correct your heart, which has indulged your child, letting him give way to pride, vanity, and ambition” [or other sins] (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3, Chapter 23).
Correct With Real Honey and Not Poisoned Honey
Likewise, we can pretend (or perhaps even sincerely believe) that we are being charitable and sweet by not correcting others and continually putting-up with their sins without taking sufficient and increasing measures to correct them. We think we are showing them charity—but, in reality, we are poisoning them. Our honey is poisoned! It seems to be “real” honey, but it is not—it is poisonous honey, a poisonous ‘charity’ that sounds like charity, seems like charity, but is not real charity.
The Trinity of the Corrector, the Correction and the Corrected
In any correction there are three essential things which much all work together for any correction to be successful. These are (1) the person doing correcting, (2) the correction that is being given, and (3) the person who is being corrected. All these three must be in harmony—easier said than done—for the correction to be successful and for a change to take place.
The person who is doing the correcting must know how to correct—like a driver must know how to drive, a soldier how to fight, a surgeon how to operate, a musician how to play his instrument, an artist how to paint, etc. There is good and bad way to correct; a right and wrong way to correct; a full or an incomplete correction; an effective and an ineffective way to correct. The person correcting must know what he/she is talking about. They must know all the required truths: the law of God, the morality of actions, the true facts of the case in question.
The correction must it must be in harmony with God’s will and God’s laws; it must be based on truth and logic, it must logically presented and understandable for the level of the person receiving it; it must be possible to accomplish; it must be non-sinful in the way it is presented and as regards the change it asks for.
The person being corrected must be humble enough to see their errors and accept truth—both the truth of God and natural truth. The person being corrected must be respected insofar as their person as a child of God, but their sin deserves no respect. For a person to stop sinning, several things need to take place. They must see their sin clearly, they must confess that sin sincerely—which means having what most people do not have—a firm purpose of amendment. They must also confess their sin and do some penance (reparation) for their sin. It is these factors that show that a person has a real sorrow for their sin. “Be sure always to entertain a hearty sorrow for the sins you confess, however small they are; as also a steadfast resolution to correct them in future … and make a firm resolution of amendment: it is a mere abuse to confess any sin whatever, be it mortal or venial, without intending to put it altogether away, that being the express object of confession” (St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 2, Chapter 19).
Liberalism—the Trojan Horse of Catholicism
Just as the Trojans managed to infiltrate the Greeks by leaving behind a charitable ‘gift’—the Trojan Horse—so too have Liberals infiltrated the once Traditional and Conservative Catholic Church. It is a virus that has spread everywhere—and when everyone is sick, then everyone seems to be ‘normal’! If we cannot clearly recognize the symptoms of Liberalism, then we will feel ‘normal’ and spiritually healthy! Here are some excellent passages from the book Liberalism is Sin by Fr. Salvany—you can get the book from TAN Books. An absolutely essential read for our Ultra-Liberal days, when even Traditionalist Catholics and Conservative Catholics are turning more and more Liberal. Most of the Conservative and Traditional Catholic world is rapidly increasing in Liberalism—especially the youth. The ultimate failure—besides a negligence in using the sources of grace (many Masses, Rosaries, Prayer, Penance and Sacrifices) to prevent the youth from being contaminated—it is also a failure to correct and correct effectively from the earliest days of childhood that has led to this tragedy. Here are a few extracts from the book, Liberalism Is A Sin, that deal with idea of correction and charity.
Liberalism is a Sin (Chapter 19—Charity & Liberalism)
All Liberals love sweetness, calm and gentleness—but often at the expense of fostering sin and allowing sin to fester. Liberals hate to correct and be corrected—that is why, in his book Liberalism is a Sin, in the chapter entitled “Charity and Liberalism”, Fr. Salvany writes:
“Narrow! Intolerant! Uncompromising! These are the insulting names hurled by Liberals of all degrees at Conservative Roman Catholics. Are not Liberals our neighbors like other men? Do we not owe to them the same charity we apply to others? Are not your vigorous denunciations—they say to us—harsh and uncharitable and in the very teeth of the teaching of Christianity, which is essentially a religion of love? Such is the accusation continually flung in our face. Let us see what its value is. Let us see all that the word “Charity” signifies.
The Catechism of the Council of Trent, that popular and most authoritative epitome of Catholic theology, gives us the most complete and succinct definition of charity; it is full of wisdom and philosophy. Charity is a supernatural virtue which induces us to love God above all things and our neighbors as ourselves for the love of God. Thus, after God we ought to love our neighbor as ourselves, and this not just in any way, but for the love of God and in obedience to His law. And now, what is it to love? To love is to wish good to him whom we love. To whom does charity command us to wish good? To our neighbor, that is to say, not to this or that man only, but to everyone. What is that good which true love wishes? First of all supernatural good, then goods of the natural order which are not incompatible with it. All this is included in the phrase “for the love of God.”
It follows, therefore, that we can love our neighbor when displeasing him, when opposing him, when causing him some material injury, and even, on certain occasions, when depriving him of life; in short, all is reduced to this: Whether in the instance where we displease, oppose, or humiliate him, it is or is not for his own good, or for the good of someone whose rights are superior to his, or simply for the greater service of God.
If it is shown that in displeasing or offending our neighbor we act for his good, it is evident that we love him, even when opposing or crossing him. The physician cauterizing his patient or cutting off his gangrened limb may nonetheless love him. When we correct the wicked by restraining or by punishing them, we do nonetheless love them. This is charity—and perfect charity.
It is often necessary to displease or offend one person, not for his own good, but to deliver another from the evil he is inflicting. It is then an obligation of charity to repel the unjust violence of the aggressor; one may inflict as much injury on the aggressor as is necessary for defense. Such would be the case should one see a highwayman attacking a traveler. In this instance, to kill, wound, or at least take such measures as to render the aggressor impotent, would be an act of true charity.
The good of all good is the divine Good, just as God is for all men the Neighbor of all neighbors. In consequence, the love due to a man, inasmuch as he is our neighbor, ought always to be subordinated to that which is due to our common Lord. For His love and in His service we must not hesitate to offend men. The degree of our offense towards men can only be measured by the degree of our obligation to Him. Charity is primarily the love of God, secondarily the love of our neighbor for God’s sake. To sacrifice the first is to abandon the latter. Therefore, to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a true act of charity. Not to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a sin.
Modern Liberalism reverses this order; it imposes a false notion of charity: our neighbor first, and, if at all, God afterwards. By its reiterated and trite accusations toward us of intolerance, it has succeeded in disconcerting even some staunch Catholics. But our rule is too plain and too concrete to admit of misconception. It is this: Sovereign Catholic inflexibility is sovereign Catholic charity.
This charity is practiced in relation to our neighbor when, in his own interest, he is crossed, humiliated, and chastised. It is practiced in relation to a third party when he is defended from the unjust aggression of another, as when he is protected from the contagion of error by unmasking its authors and abettors and showing them in their true light as iniquitous and pervert, by holding them up to the contempt, horror, and execration of all. It is practiced in relation to God when, for His glory and in His service, it becomes necessary to silence all human considerations, to trample under foot all human respect, to sacrifice all human interests—and even life itself—to attain this highest of all ends.
All this is Catholic inflexibility and inflexible Catholicity in the practice of that pure love which constitutes sovereign charity. The Saints are the types of this unswerving and sovereign fidelity to God, the heroes of charity and religion. Because in our times there are so few true inflexibles in the love of God, so also are there few uncompromisers in the order of charity. Liberal charity is condescending, affectionate, even tender in appearance, but at bottom it is an essential contempt for the true good of men, of the supreme interests of truth and [ultimately] of God. It is human self-love, usurping the throne of the Most High and demanding that worship which belongs to God alone.” (Fr. Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin, chapter 19: “Charity and Liberalism”).
Liberalism is a Sin (Chapters 18 & 28)
“Many Catholics, by far too naive, are perpetually seeking to pose as impartial … They are fearful of being considered narrow-minded and partial if they do not ‘give the devil his due’. In their flattery, they hope to show that it costs a Catholic nothing to recognize merit wherever it may be found; they imagine this to be a powerful means of attracting the enemy. Alas, the folly of the weaklings! They play a losing game! It is they who are insensibly attracted, not the enemy! They simply fly at the bait held out by the cunning fisher who satanically guides the destinies of Liberalism” (Fr. Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin, chapter 18: “Literature and Liberalism”).
“Liberalism may speak the language of charity, appealing to us from the tenderest side, and ask us to associate ourselves with it in the name of a common humanity. ‘Put aside all differences of creed and let us fraternize on the broader plane of brotherly love’ is often its most insidious appeal. Such instances are arising every day of our lives” (Fr. Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin, chapter 28).
The Honey-Bee Catholics Who End Up Being Stung
We live in a sweet and sugary world! A world where we compassionately smile at whatever is said and done! Teachers are now limited in how they can discipline their students. Parents risk the wrath of the Social Services for disciplining their children. Everybody’s self-esteem is placed above the esteem of God. Man is placed before God. Charity to man takes precedence over charity to God. Yet Holy Scripture commands otherwise: “And one of them, a doctor of the law, asking Him, tempting Him: ‘Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law?’ Jesus said to him: ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’” (Matthew 22:35-39). Fr. Salvany, in his book, Liberalism is a Sin, writes: “Modern Liberalism reverses this order; it imposes a false notion of charity: our neighbor first, and, if at all, God afterwards. By its reiterated and trite accusations toward us of intolerance, it has succeeded in disconcerting even some staunch Catholics.”
We change the language to avoid labeling people. We call homosexuals “gay” (happy) people. We call criminals “offenders”. We call fornicators and adulterers “lovers”. We call pornography “adult material”. We call lust “love”. We call sin “a fault”. The list goes on. We see children grossly misbehave, throw tantrums and wreck things while nobody dares to correct them—they just smile and say: “Oh isn’t he/she sweet! They’re just having an off-day!” Criminals sometimes come away looking like the victim! As Holy Scripture says: “Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter” (Isaias 5:20).
That is exactly where we are today—where evil is being called ‘good’, and true goodness is being called evil. It has become a “hate crime” to hate evil and it has become ‘virtuous’ to tolerate evil. “Be not deceived, God is not mocked! For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh, of the flesh also shall reap corruption” (Galatians 6:7-8). We are now afraid to correct for fear of being looked upon as being wrong. We just sit down, shut-up and don’t rock the boat! It is this vicious human respect that makes us accomplices in damning many souls—not least the souls of our own family! “But their children provoked Me, they walked not in My commandments, nor observed My judgments … and they violated My Sabbaths: and I threatened to pour out My indignation upon them and to accomplish My wrath in them” (Ezechiel 20:21). “Woe to you, apostate children, saith the Lord, that you would take counsel, and not of Me: and would begin a web, and not by My spirit, that you might add sin upon sin” (Isaias 30:1).
Our Lord Himself said: “Do not think that I came to send peace upon Earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on Earth? I tell you, no; but separation. For there shall be from henceforth five in one house divided: three against two, and two against three … For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household … He that loveth father or mother more than Me, is not worthy of Me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than Me, is not worthy of Me!” (Matthew 10:34-37; Luke 12:51-52). Parents and teachers, priests and bishops are not there primarily to be “buddy-buddy” with everyone under their charge, but to lead those under their charge to a greater knowledge, love and service of God. On many an occasion, many a person will not want to hear or do that. Our friendship and obedience to God comes before our friendship and accommodation of others.
“Thou shalt read the words of God’s law before all, in their hearing. And the people, being all assembled together, both men and women, children and strangers, that are within thy gates, that hearing they may learn, and fear the Lord your God, and keep, and fulfill all the words of His law. That their children, also, who now are ignorant, may hear and fear the Lord their God” (Deuteronomy 31:11-13).
“Thou shalt read the words of God’s law before all, in their hearing. And the people, being all assembled together, both men and women, children and strangers, that are within thy gates, that hearing they may learn, and fear the Lord your God, and keep, and fulfill all the words of His law. That their children, also, who now are ignorant, may hear and fear the Lord their God” (Deuteronomy 31:11-13).
Article 6
The Most Common Mistakes in Correcting Others
The Most Common Mistakes in Correcting Others
REASONS WHY PARENTS WILL NOT DISCIPLINE THEIR CHILDREN
Disciplining children is hard work. It requires constant vigilance, consistency, and thought-provoking effort. So if you’re a little lax on those days you’re tired or overwhelmed, you’re not alone.
A lack of discipline, however, can be a serious problem. And while it may be tempting to make excuses for your child’s behavior, limits and consequences are important.
Don’t let these 10 excuses get in the way of giving your child healthy discipline.
► “I feel sorry for him. He’s been under a lot of stress lately.”
Parents sometimes feel guilty when children have had to endure rough times, such as a divorce or being bullied at school. It’s natural to feel bad. After all, who wants to see their child hurt?
Allowing misbehavior to slide, however, isn’t the solution. In fact, stressed out children need discipline more than ever to help them feel secure. Show your child that you’re able to keep him safe by setting limits.
► “He didn’t mean to do that.”
Children shouldn’t be disciplined for accidentally spilling a glass of milk, but they can take responsibility for their actions by helping to clean it up. Allowing too much leeway because something was an “accident” prevents children from accepting full responsibility for their behavior.
If you decide, “He didn’t really mean to push his brother that hard,” and excuse it, he’s likely to learn he can talk his way out of things by using the “It was an accident” excuse. But a police officer won’t excuse him for “accidentally speeding” and his future boss isn’t likely to shrug it off when he says he “didn’t mean to” lose that big sale.
► “I haven’t spent much time with them lately.”
Allowing your child to misbehave because you feel guilty won’t do either one of you any good. If you feel bad, look for other ways to resolve your guilt about discipline.
For example, do you need to create more time to spend together? Or do you need to remind yourself that it is good for your child to have healthy discipline?
Make your time together count by following through with clear limits. Then, you can spend more time enjoying one another’s company when you have time to be together.
► “I was too hard on him yesterday.”
If you offered up some harsh discipline earlier, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t discipline him now. It’s essential that you’re consistent with discipline.
Inconsistency confuses children and leads to increased behavior problems. So even if you were a little extra hard yesterday, show your child that you’re still going to enforce the rules today.
► “Children will be children.”
There is certainly such a thing as normal misbehavior. However, it’s important to distinguish between normal and abnormal child behavior problems.
Allowing children to get away with misbehavior by chalking it up to “normal kid stuff” can be detrimental if you’re letting your child get away with too many rule violations. Children need to learn how to make healthier choices so they can become responsible adults.
► “I don’t want him to be upset.”
It can be tempting sometimes to look the other way when your child’s having a good time and you know placing him in time-out will upset him. However, teaching children to deal with negative feelings is one of the six life skills your discipline should be teaching.
You’ll be doing him a disservice by not helping him learn how to regulate his emotions. So follow through with a consequence and help your child learn emotion regulation skills while you’re at it.
► “I’m too tired to deal with it.”
There will be days that you just feel too exhausted or drained to give out one more negative consequence. However, it’s important to muster up the energy to offer consistent discipline.
Devote extra time and energy into behavior problems now and it’ll reduce the effort needed down the road. Think of the energy you put in now as an investment that will pay off later.
► “He won’t listen anyway.”
A lack of confidence in parenting can prevent parents from stepping in. They fear their child won’t go to time-out or won’t listen when privileges are taken away.
If consequences aren’t effective, examine the reasons why your discipline isn’t working. Avoiding discipline will only make the problem worse and it’s essential that you gain parenting skills to discipline effectively.
► “He’ll think I’m mean.”
One of the four biggest parenting mistakes is only looking at the short-term. In the short-term, your child might think you’re mean for taking away his toy or not letting him play outside.
However, in the long-term, it’s the best thing for him and is essential to helping him learn. Sometimes, when your child is angry with you, it means you’re doing your job well.
► “I always have to be the bad guy.”
If you’ve got a partner who lets your child get away with behavior problems, it’s likely you’ll feel like the bad guy when you lay down the law. Learn how to discipline together with your partner so your child doesn’t view one of you as the “bad guy.”
Establish household rules and work together to enforce these rules consistently. Your child’s behavior is likely to improve when you show a united front.
Disciplining children is hard work. It requires constant vigilance, consistency, and thought-provoking effort. So if you’re a little lax on those days you’re tired or overwhelmed, you’re not alone.
A lack of discipline, however, can be a serious problem. And while it may be tempting to make excuses for your child’s behavior, limits and consequences are important.
Don’t let these 10 excuses get in the way of giving your child healthy discipline.
► “I feel sorry for him. He’s been under a lot of stress lately.”
Parents sometimes feel guilty when children have had to endure rough times, such as a divorce or being bullied at school. It’s natural to feel bad. After all, who wants to see their child hurt?
Allowing misbehavior to slide, however, isn’t the solution. In fact, stressed out children need discipline more than ever to help them feel secure. Show your child that you’re able to keep him safe by setting limits.
► “He didn’t mean to do that.”
Children shouldn’t be disciplined for accidentally spilling a glass of milk, but they can take responsibility for their actions by helping to clean it up. Allowing too much leeway because something was an “accident” prevents children from accepting full responsibility for their behavior.
If you decide, “He didn’t really mean to push his brother that hard,” and excuse it, he’s likely to learn he can talk his way out of things by using the “It was an accident” excuse. But a police officer won’t excuse him for “accidentally speeding” and his future boss isn’t likely to shrug it off when he says he “didn’t mean to” lose that big sale.
► “I haven’t spent much time with them lately.”
Allowing your child to misbehave because you feel guilty won’t do either one of you any good. If you feel bad, look for other ways to resolve your guilt about discipline.
For example, do you need to create more time to spend together? Or do you need to remind yourself that it is good for your child to have healthy discipline?
Make your time together count by following through with clear limits. Then, you can spend more time enjoying one another’s company when you have time to be together.
► “I was too hard on him yesterday.”
If you offered up some harsh discipline earlier, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t discipline him now. It’s essential that you’re consistent with discipline.
Inconsistency confuses children and leads to increased behavior problems. So even if you were a little extra hard yesterday, show your child that you’re still going to enforce the rules today.
► “Children will be children.”
There is certainly such a thing as normal misbehavior. However, it’s important to distinguish between normal and abnormal child behavior problems.
Allowing children to get away with misbehavior by chalking it up to “normal kid stuff” can be detrimental if you’re letting your child get away with too many rule violations. Children need to learn how to make healthier choices so they can become responsible adults.
► “I don’t want him to be upset.”
It can be tempting sometimes to look the other way when your child’s having a good time and you know placing him in time-out will upset him. However, teaching children to deal with negative feelings is one of the six life skills your discipline should be teaching.
You’ll be doing him a disservice by not helping him learn how to regulate his emotions. So follow through with a consequence and help your child learn emotion regulation skills while you’re at it.
► “I’m too tired to deal with it.”
There will be days that you just feel too exhausted or drained to give out one more negative consequence. However, it’s important to muster up the energy to offer consistent discipline.
Devote extra time and energy into behavior problems now and it’ll reduce the effort needed down the road. Think of the energy you put in now as an investment that will pay off later.
► “He won’t listen anyway.”
A lack of confidence in parenting can prevent parents from stepping in. They fear their child won’t go to time-out or won’t listen when privileges are taken away.
If consequences aren’t effective, examine the reasons why your discipline isn’t working. Avoiding discipline will only make the problem worse and it’s essential that you gain parenting skills to discipline effectively.
► “He’ll think I’m mean.”
One of the four biggest parenting mistakes is only looking at the short-term. In the short-term, your child might think you’re mean for taking away his toy or not letting him play outside.
However, in the long-term, it’s the best thing for him and is essential to helping him learn. Sometimes, when your child is angry with you, it means you’re doing your job well.
► “I always have to be the bad guy.”
If you’ve got a partner who lets your child get away with behavior problems, it’s likely you’ll feel like the bad guy when you lay down the law. Learn how to discipline together with your partner so your child doesn’t view one of you as the “bad guy.”
Establish household rules and work together to enforce these rules consistently. Your child’s behavior is likely to improve when you show a united front.
Article 7
More Mistakes in Correcting Others
More Mistakes in Correcting Others
Connect Before You Correct—and 9 Other Ways to Change Your Parental Perspective
One thing most parents can agree on is that parenting is challenging, whether you are a parent of a baby, toddler, or teenager. One day you may feel as if you’ve figured it all out and then the next you feel like the worst parent in the world. Many parents spend too much time searching for ways to change their child’s behavior. This method of parenting often backfires and parents are perplexed when they are left with crying babies, toddlers having major meltdowns, and disrespectful teenagers. What if we stopped trying to change our children and, instead, changed how we thought about parenting? What if we chose to view parenting through rose-colored glasses? What if we decided not to take everything so seriously? We may not have the power to control our children, but we do have the power to adjust our thoughts and feelings about the struggles of parenting. With a few changes, you can enjoy your children more and when your behavior changes, so does your child’s behavior. Changing the way you view parenting will create a stronger and more positive relationship between you and your children.
1. Adjust How You Perceive the Problem
Think about something your child does that makes you lose your cool. We are all triggered by different things. Is it when your toddler raises her voice in public? Or is it when 10-year-old refuses to clean his room? Think about why the behavior bothers you. Are you embarrassed in front of others? Was this behavior unacceptable when you were a child? Many of these behaviors are frustrating, but they are also developmentally appropriate. Think about what your child may be getting out of this behavior you consider “bad.” A negative reaction from a parent is good enough for a kid who is trying to get any attention, but it will only keeping the behavior going. The less you stress about the behavior, the sooner it will come to an end. Focus on the future behavior after the correction. Be positive, not negative. Sometimes the power struggle is the reason the behavior continues.
2. Share the Emotional Responsibility
For many parents, it is hard enough to share the physical responsibility of raising a child. One parent may take on more responsibilities such as changing more diapers and running the children around to after-school activities. Yet many parents don’t consider sharing the emotional responsibilities. If you are feeling worried about how your kid is doing in school or simply feeling overwhelmed by all the emotions that come with parenting, share those with your spouse, a friend or someone you can trust.
3. Try to Lower Your Expectations
Sometimes we forget that our children are children. Expecting your children to act more maturely, or to do things that are not age appropriate, will only set them up for failure. Do you expect your young child to have proper adult table manners, to sit for long meals, or greet all your friends and relatives. This has to be begun at an early age, but achieved progressively or gradually. Teaching your children these “adult” behaviors and modeling them, will encourage your children to do them, but keep your expectations in check, especially if your child has not napped, or is hungry. Holiday season is a time when these unwanted behaviors come out because children get overwhelmed by big gatherings, or their schedules and routines are thrown off. Some children are more introverted or shy, and feel uncomfortable talking to adults. If you try to lower your expectations, there is less room for you to get frustrated with your child.
4. Put Your Oxygen Mask on First
Taking care of yourself is one of the most important parts of parenting, but one that gets put on the back-burner. Self-care is not selfish; it is necessary. Daily parenting is overwhelming, stressful and can cause burn-out. Parents need time to re-energize. Taking time away from your family, whether it is an hour, or a weekend, will be the best thing for your family.
5. Be Consistent
Being a consistent parent is very important. It is also incredibly hard, after all, sometimes we put a rule in place and then let it slide when we are rushed or tired or simply don’t want to deal. Children learn through repetition and feel secure when they are able to predict what will happen next. If a parent has a different response each time a kid has a tantrum, the brain’s process of rehearing and internalizing is disrupted. Inconsistencies teach children to live with anxiety and chaos. Children thrive more with routine, structure and limits.
6. Connect Before you Correct
If your child is exhibiting an undesirable behavior, first try and connect with your child before addressing the behavior. The behavior may be a manifestation of a need for attention, feeling isolated, sad, or another negative emotion. After your child feels connected and responsive, you can address the behavior in a calm manner. Correcting by yelling, or timeouts, is not teaching your child any positive lessons. Connecting with your child will make your job as parent easier, because children, who feel connected, have better listening skills, feel less frustrated, have higher self-esteem and make better decisions. Spend at least 15 minutes a day engaging with your child, with no other distractions. Sincerely, not superificially, engaging in meaningful activities with your children is a wonderful way to get to know them better, build their self-esteem, share values, strengthen emotional intelligence, and create special memories.
7. Coach Instead of Control
Parenting is essentially being your child’s life coach. You are the person who teaches them how to make good decisions, learn from mistakes, be brave enough to get through hard things. Children learn by watching you. If you control your child, how will they ever learn to make decisions for themselves? Let your child problem-solve with you, so they can build the confidence to go into the world.
8. See Through Your Child’s Eyes
Children are not adults. Many times, parents dismiss children feelings because they view them as immature or dramatic. When your child is upset, take a step back, don’t judge, and view the situation through your child’s eyes. This exercise makes it easier to be empathetic towards your child’s feelings. Once you are feeling empathetic, you can validate their feelings―which is key to raising resilient children. Showing empathy will let your child know it is safe to tell you his or her sad feelings.
9. Parent the Child You Have, Not the Child You Want
Did you hope to raise an athlete and you have a kid with a brilliant brain? Remove your ideas of what you thought your child would be like and really appreciate the one you have. This is especially important for parents of multiple children. Each child is different, with different qualities, flaws, and personalities and each should be parented in a way that suits their needs. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. Once you start parenting the child you have, your job as parent will feel much easier.
10. Be the Person You Want Your Child to Be
Children learn directly from watching you. They model what you do and what you say. They treat people the way they see you treat people. Children are not born perfect. They also cannot be bribed, tricked, lectured, or coerced into being respectful, compassionate human beings. Your children will become what you show them so treat them kindly, trust them, respect them. Be the change you want your children to be.
One thing most parents can agree on is that parenting is challenging, whether you are a parent of a baby, toddler, or teenager. One day you may feel as if you’ve figured it all out and then the next you feel like the worst parent in the world. Many parents spend too much time searching for ways to change their child’s behavior. This method of parenting often backfires and parents are perplexed when they are left with crying babies, toddlers having major meltdowns, and disrespectful teenagers. What if we stopped trying to change our children and, instead, changed how we thought about parenting? What if we chose to view parenting through rose-colored glasses? What if we decided not to take everything so seriously? We may not have the power to control our children, but we do have the power to adjust our thoughts and feelings about the struggles of parenting. With a few changes, you can enjoy your children more and when your behavior changes, so does your child’s behavior. Changing the way you view parenting will create a stronger and more positive relationship between you and your children.
1. Adjust How You Perceive the Problem
Think about something your child does that makes you lose your cool. We are all triggered by different things. Is it when your toddler raises her voice in public? Or is it when 10-year-old refuses to clean his room? Think about why the behavior bothers you. Are you embarrassed in front of others? Was this behavior unacceptable when you were a child? Many of these behaviors are frustrating, but they are also developmentally appropriate. Think about what your child may be getting out of this behavior you consider “bad.” A negative reaction from a parent is good enough for a kid who is trying to get any attention, but it will only keeping the behavior going. The less you stress about the behavior, the sooner it will come to an end. Focus on the future behavior after the correction. Be positive, not negative. Sometimes the power struggle is the reason the behavior continues.
2. Share the Emotional Responsibility
For many parents, it is hard enough to share the physical responsibility of raising a child. One parent may take on more responsibilities such as changing more diapers and running the children around to after-school activities. Yet many parents don’t consider sharing the emotional responsibilities. If you are feeling worried about how your kid is doing in school or simply feeling overwhelmed by all the emotions that come with parenting, share those with your spouse, a friend or someone you can trust.
3. Try to Lower Your Expectations
Sometimes we forget that our children are children. Expecting your children to act more maturely, or to do things that are not age appropriate, will only set them up for failure. Do you expect your young child to have proper adult table manners, to sit for long meals, or greet all your friends and relatives. This has to be begun at an early age, but achieved progressively or gradually. Teaching your children these “adult” behaviors and modeling them, will encourage your children to do them, but keep your expectations in check, especially if your child has not napped, or is hungry. Holiday season is a time when these unwanted behaviors come out because children get overwhelmed by big gatherings, or their schedules and routines are thrown off. Some children are more introverted or shy, and feel uncomfortable talking to adults. If you try to lower your expectations, there is less room for you to get frustrated with your child.
4. Put Your Oxygen Mask on First
Taking care of yourself is one of the most important parts of parenting, but one that gets put on the back-burner. Self-care is not selfish; it is necessary. Daily parenting is overwhelming, stressful and can cause burn-out. Parents need time to re-energize. Taking time away from your family, whether it is an hour, or a weekend, will be the best thing for your family.
5. Be Consistent
Being a consistent parent is very important. It is also incredibly hard, after all, sometimes we put a rule in place and then let it slide when we are rushed or tired or simply don’t want to deal. Children learn through repetition and feel secure when they are able to predict what will happen next. If a parent has a different response each time a kid has a tantrum, the brain’s process of rehearing and internalizing is disrupted. Inconsistencies teach children to live with anxiety and chaos. Children thrive more with routine, structure and limits.
6. Connect Before you Correct
If your child is exhibiting an undesirable behavior, first try and connect with your child before addressing the behavior. The behavior may be a manifestation of a need for attention, feeling isolated, sad, or another negative emotion. After your child feels connected and responsive, you can address the behavior in a calm manner. Correcting by yelling, or timeouts, is not teaching your child any positive lessons. Connecting with your child will make your job as parent easier, because children, who feel connected, have better listening skills, feel less frustrated, have higher self-esteem and make better decisions. Spend at least 15 minutes a day engaging with your child, with no other distractions. Sincerely, not superificially, engaging in meaningful activities with your children is a wonderful way to get to know them better, build their self-esteem, share values, strengthen emotional intelligence, and create special memories.
7. Coach Instead of Control
Parenting is essentially being your child’s life coach. You are the person who teaches them how to make good decisions, learn from mistakes, be brave enough to get through hard things. Children learn by watching you. If you control your child, how will they ever learn to make decisions for themselves? Let your child problem-solve with you, so they can build the confidence to go into the world.
8. See Through Your Child’s Eyes
Children are not adults. Many times, parents dismiss children feelings because they view them as immature or dramatic. When your child is upset, take a step back, don’t judge, and view the situation through your child’s eyes. This exercise makes it easier to be empathetic towards your child’s feelings. Once you are feeling empathetic, you can validate their feelings―which is key to raising resilient children. Showing empathy will let your child know it is safe to tell you his or her sad feelings.
9. Parent the Child You Have, Not the Child You Want
Did you hope to raise an athlete and you have a kid with a brilliant brain? Remove your ideas of what you thought your child would be like and really appreciate the one you have. This is especially important for parents of multiple children. Each child is different, with different qualities, flaws, and personalities and each should be parented in a way that suits their needs. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. Once you start parenting the child you have, your job as parent will feel much easier.
10. Be the Person You Want Your Child to Be
Children learn directly from watching you. They model what you do and what you say. They treat people the way they see you treat people. Children are not born perfect. They also cannot be bribed, tricked, lectured, or coerced into being respectful, compassionate human beings. Your children will become what you show them so treat them kindly, trust them, respect them. Be the change you want your children to be.
Article 8
You Need To Change Your Approach
You Need To Change Your Approach
Things Mentally Strong Parents Don’t Do
Raising mentally strong children who are equipped to take on real-world challenges requires parents to give up the unhealthy — yet popular — parenting practices that are robbing children of mental strength.
Of course, helping children build mental muscle isn’t easy — it requires parents to be mentally strong as well. Watching children struggle, pushing them to face their fears, and holding them accountable for their mistakes is tough. But those are the types of experiences children need to reach their greatest potential.
Parents who train their children’s brains for a life of meaning, happiness, and success, avoid these 13 things:
1. They Don’t Condone A Victim Mentality
Getting cut from the soccer team or failing a class doesn’t make your child a victim. Rejection, failure, and unfairness are part of life. Rather than allow children to host pity parties or exaggerate their misfortune, mentally strong parents encourage their children to turn their struggles into strength. They help them identify ways in which they can take positive action, despite their circumstances.
2. They Don’t Parent Out Of Guilt
Guilty feelings can lead to a long list of unhealthy parenting strategies — like giving in to your child after you’ve said no or overindulging your child on the holidays. Mentally strong parents know that although guilt is uncomfortable, it’s tolerable. They refuse to let their guilty feelings get in the way of making wise choices.
3. They Don’t Make Their Child The Center Of The Universe
It can be tempting to make your life revolve around your child. But children who think they’re the center of the universe grow up to be self-absorbed and entitled. Mentally strong parents teach their children to focus on what they have to offer the world — rather than what they’re owed.
4. They Don’t Allow Fear To Dictate Their Choices
Keeping your child inside a protective bubble could spare you a lot of anxiety. But keeping children too safe stunts their development. Virtue stands in the middle between excess and neglect, over cautiousness and recklessness, cowardice and foolhardiness. Mentally strong parents view themselves as guides, not protectors—much like God is to the human race. God could prevent everyone from falling into Hell, but He doesn’t. He gives us the advice and instructions we need and then we pay for whatever consequences result. They allow their children to go out into the world and experience life in safe and prudent manner, following the counsels of Christ, even when it’s scary to let go.
5. They Don’t Give Their Child Power Over Them
Children who dictate what the family is going to eat for dinner, or those who orchestrate how to spend their weekends, have too much power. Becoming more like an equal — or even the boss — isn’t healthy for children. Mentally strong parents empower children to make appropriate choices while maintaining a clear hierarchy.
6. They Don’t Expect Perfection
High expectations are healthy, seeking perfection—as Our Lord said—is necessary, but expecting too much too soom from children will backfire. Mentally strong parents recognize that their children are not going to excel at everything they do. Rather than push their children to be better than everyone else, they focus on helping them become the best versions of themselves.
7. They Don’t Let Their Child Avoid Responsibility
You won’t catch a mentally strong parent saying things like, “I don’t want to burden my children with chores. Children should just be children.” The child will love being free of chores and be sour-faced in being given chores. Mentally strong parents expect children to pitch in and learn the skills they need to become responsible citizens. They proactively teach their children to take responsibility for their choices and they assign them age-appropriate duties.
8. They Don’t Shield Their Child From Pain
It’s tough to watch children struggle with hurt feelings or anxiety. But, children need practice and first-hand experience tolerating discomfort. Mentally strong parents provide their children with the support and help they need coping with pain so their children can gain confidence in their ability to deal with whatever hardships life throws their way.
9. They Don’t Feel Responsible For Their Child’s Emotions
It can be tempting to cheer your children up when they’re sad, or calm them down when they’re angry. But, regulating your children’ emotions for them prevents them from gaining social and emotional skills. Mentally strong parents teach their children how to be responsible for their own emotions, so they don’t depend on others to do it for them.
10. They Don’t Prevent Their Child From Making Mistakes
Whether your child gets a few questions wrong on his math homework or he forgets to pack his cleats for soccer practice, mistakes can be life’s greatest teacher. Mentally strong parents let their children mess up — and they allow them to face the natural consequences of their actions. The chief mistakes that the parent should seek to prevent are the ‘mistakes’ we call “sin”.
11. They Don’t Confuse Discipline With Punishment
Punishment is about making children suffer for their wrongdoing. Discipline is about teaching them how to do better in the future. And while mentally strong parents do give out consequences, their ultimate goal is to teach children to develop the self-discipline they’ll need to make better choices down the road.
12. They Don’t Take Shortcuts To Avoid Discomfort
Giving in when a child whines, or doing your children’s chores for them, is fast and easy. But, those shortcuts teach children unhealthy habits. It takes mental strength to tolerate discomfort and avoid those tempting shortcuts.
13. They Don’t Lose Sight Of Their Values
In today’s fast-paced world it’s easy to get wrapped up in the day-to-day business of homework, chores, and sports practices. Those hectic schedules — combined with the pressure to look like parent of the year on social media —cause many people to lose sight of what’s really important in life. Mentally strong parents know their values and they ensure their family lives according to them.
14. They Are Not Afraid Of Putting God Before The World
In this very Liberal and worldly world, it demands that parents be mentally strong in clearly putting God, the Faith and the spiritual life before and above the world, worldly activities and the material life. This is sure to bring scowls to faces and whines to lips—but the parent must put the theory of the Faith into practice from the very earliest days of the child’s existence. “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves!” (James 1:22). Do not become like the hypocrites that Our Lord condemned: “Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me!’” (Mark 7:6).
Raising mentally strong children who are equipped to take on real-world challenges requires parents to give up the unhealthy — yet popular — parenting practices that are robbing children of mental strength.
Of course, helping children build mental muscle isn’t easy — it requires parents to be mentally strong as well. Watching children struggle, pushing them to face their fears, and holding them accountable for their mistakes is tough. But those are the types of experiences children need to reach their greatest potential.
Parents who train their children’s brains for a life of meaning, happiness, and success, avoid these 13 things:
1. They Don’t Condone A Victim Mentality
Getting cut from the soccer team or failing a class doesn’t make your child a victim. Rejection, failure, and unfairness are part of life. Rather than allow children to host pity parties or exaggerate their misfortune, mentally strong parents encourage their children to turn their struggles into strength. They help them identify ways in which they can take positive action, despite their circumstances.
2. They Don’t Parent Out Of Guilt
Guilty feelings can lead to a long list of unhealthy parenting strategies — like giving in to your child after you’ve said no or overindulging your child on the holidays. Mentally strong parents know that although guilt is uncomfortable, it’s tolerable. They refuse to let their guilty feelings get in the way of making wise choices.
3. They Don’t Make Their Child The Center Of The Universe
It can be tempting to make your life revolve around your child. But children who think they’re the center of the universe grow up to be self-absorbed and entitled. Mentally strong parents teach their children to focus on what they have to offer the world — rather than what they’re owed.
4. They Don’t Allow Fear To Dictate Their Choices
Keeping your child inside a protective bubble could spare you a lot of anxiety. But keeping children too safe stunts their development. Virtue stands in the middle between excess and neglect, over cautiousness and recklessness, cowardice and foolhardiness. Mentally strong parents view themselves as guides, not protectors—much like God is to the human race. God could prevent everyone from falling into Hell, but He doesn’t. He gives us the advice and instructions we need and then we pay for whatever consequences result. They allow their children to go out into the world and experience life in safe and prudent manner, following the counsels of Christ, even when it’s scary to let go.
5. They Don’t Give Their Child Power Over Them
Children who dictate what the family is going to eat for dinner, or those who orchestrate how to spend their weekends, have too much power. Becoming more like an equal — or even the boss — isn’t healthy for children. Mentally strong parents empower children to make appropriate choices while maintaining a clear hierarchy.
6. They Don’t Expect Perfection
High expectations are healthy, seeking perfection—as Our Lord said—is necessary, but expecting too much too soom from children will backfire. Mentally strong parents recognize that their children are not going to excel at everything they do. Rather than push their children to be better than everyone else, they focus on helping them become the best versions of themselves.
7. They Don’t Let Their Child Avoid Responsibility
You won’t catch a mentally strong parent saying things like, “I don’t want to burden my children with chores. Children should just be children.” The child will love being free of chores and be sour-faced in being given chores. Mentally strong parents expect children to pitch in and learn the skills they need to become responsible citizens. They proactively teach their children to take responsibility for their choices and they assign them age-appropriate duties.
8. They Don’t Shield Their Child From Pain
It’s tough to watch children struggle with hurt feelings or anxiety. But, children need practice and first-hand experience tolerating discomfort. Mentally strong parents provide their children with the support and help they need coping with pain so their children can gain confidence in their ability to deal with whatever hardships life throws their way.
9. They Don’t Feel Responsible For Their Child’s Emotions
It can be tempting to cheer your children up when they’re sad, or calm them down when they’re angry. But, regulating your children’ emotions for them prevents them from gaining social and emotional skills. Mentally strong parents teach their children how to be responsible for their own emotions, so they don’t depend on others to do it for them.
10. They Don’t Prevent Their Child From Making Mistakes
Whether your child gets a few questions wrong on his math homework or he forgets to pack his cleats for soccer practice, mistakes can be life’s greatest teacher. Mentally strong parents let their children mess up — and they allow them to face the natural consequences of their actions. The chief mistakes that the parent should seek to prevent are the ‘mistakes’ we call “sin”.
11. They Don’t Confuse Discipline With Punishment
Punishment is about making children suffer for their wrongdoing. Discipline is about teaching them how to do better in the future. And while mentally strong parents do give out consequences, their ultimate goal is to teach children to develop the self-discipline they’ll need to make better choices down the road.
12. They Don’t Take Shortcuts To Avoid Discomfort
Giving in when a child whines, or doing your children’s chores for them, is fast and easy. But, those shortcuts teach children unhealthy habits. It takes mental strength to tolerate discomfort and avoid those tempting shortcuts.
13. They Don’t Lose Sight Of Their Values
In today’s fast-paced world it’s easy to get wrapped up in the day-to-day business of homework, chores, and sports practices. Those hectic schedules — combined with the pressure to look like parent of the year on social media —cause many people to lose sight of what’s really important in life. Mentally strong parents know their values and they ensure their family lives according to them.
14. They Are Not Afraid Of Putting God Before The World
In this very Liberal and worldly world, it demands that parents be mentally strong in clearly putting God, the Faith and the spiritual life before and above the world, worldly activities and the material life. This is sure to bring scowls to faces and whines to lips—but the parent must put the theory of the Faith into practice from the very earliest days of the child’s existence. “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves!” (James 1:22). Do not become like the hypocrites that Our Lord condemned: “Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me!’” (Mark 7:6).
Article 9
Disciplining By Ages—From Toddler to Teen
Disciplining By Ages—From Toddler to Teen
Whatever your child’s age, it’s important to be consistent when it comes to discipline. If parents don’t stick to the rules and consequences they set up, their children aren’t likely to either.
Here are some ideas about how to vary your approach to discipline to best fit your family.
► Ages 0 to 2
Babies and toddlers are naturally curious. So it’s wise to eliminate temptations and “no-nos” — items such as TVs and video equipment, stereos, jewelry, fragile objects, and especially cleaning supplies and medicines should be kept well out of reach.
When your crawling baby, or roving toddler, heads toward an unacceptable or dangerous play object, calmly say “No” and, either remove your child from the area, or distract him or her with an appropriate activity.
Timeouts can be effective discipline for toddlers. A child who has been hitting, biting, or throwing food, for example, should be told why the behavior is unacceptable and taken to a designated timeout area — a kitchen chair or bottom stair — for a minute or two to calm down (longer timeouts are not effective for toddlers).
It’s important to not spank, hit, or slap a child at this age. Babies and toddlers are especially unlikely to be able to make any connection between their behavior and physical punishment―they do not have the power of reasoning yet. They will only feel the pain of the hit.
And don’t forget that children learn by watching adults, particularly their parents. Make sure your behavior is role-model material. You’ll make a much stronger impression by putting your own belongings away rather than just issuing orders to your child to pick up toys while your stuff is left strewn around.
► Ages 3 to 5
As your child grows and begins to understand the connection between actions and consequences, make sure you start communicating the rules of your family’s home.
Explain to children what you expect of them before you punish them for a behavior. The first time your 3-year-old uses crayons to decorate the living room wall, discuss why that’s not allowed and what will happen if your child does it again (for instance, your child will have to help clean the wall and will not be able to use the crayons for the rest of the day). If the wall gets decorated again a few days later, issue a reminder that crayons are for paper only and then enforce the consequences. Spanking—much like capital punishment, should be the last resort. Too many parents use spanking as a kind of “one spank fits all misbehavior” as in “one size fits all”.
The earlier that parents establish this kind of “I set the rules and you’re expected to listen or accept the consequences” standard, the better for everyone. Although it’s sometimes easier for parents to ignore occasional bad behavior or not follow through on some threatened punishment, this sets a bad precedent. Nature does not act that way—every time you pick-up a hot gridiron with your bare hands, it will burn you and give you pain without exceptions. Empty threats undermine your authority as a parent, and make it more likely that children will test limits. Consistency is the key to effective discipline, and it’s important for parents to decide (together, if you are not a single parent) what the rules are and then uphold them. Writing-out the rules and a variety of punishments in increasing degrees, is not a bad idea.
While you become clear on what behaviors will be punished, don’t forget to reward good behaviors. Don’t underestimate the positive effect that your praise can have — discipline is not just about punishment, but also about recognizing good behavior. For example, saying: “I’m proud of you for sharing your toys with others” is usually more effective than punishing a child who didn’t share. And be specific when giving praise rather than just saying “Good job!” You want to make it clear which behaviors you liked. This makes them more likely to happen in the future — the more attention we give to a behavior, the more likely it is to continue.
If your child continues an unacceptable behavior, no matter what you do, try making a chart with a box for each day of the week. Decide how many times your child can misbehave in minor matters before a punishment kicks in or how long the proper behavior must be seen before it is rewarded. The more a child abuses this policy, the less tolerance is shown to that child. Post the chart on the refrigerator and then track the good and unacceptable behaviors every day. This will give your child (and you) a concrete look at how it’s going. Once this begins to work, praise your child for learning to control misbehavior and, especially, for overcoming any stubborn problem.
Timeouts also can work well for children at this age. Pick a suitable timeout place, such as a chair or bottom step, that’s free of distractions. Remember, getting sent to your room isn’t effective if a computer, TV, or games are there. Also, a timeout is time away from any type of reinforcement. So your child shouldn’t get any attention from you while in a timeout — including talking, eye contact, etc.
Be sure to consider the length of time that will work best for your child. Experts say 1 minute for each year of age is a good rule of thumb; others recommend using the timeout until the child is calmed down (to teach self-regulation). Make sure that if a timeout happens because your child didn’t follow directions, you follow through with the direction after the timeout.
It’s important to tell children what the right thing to do is, not just to say what the wrong thing is. For example, instead of saying “Don’t jump on the couch,” try “Floors are made for standing and walking-on, couches are made for sitting-on! Please sit on the couch, that is what it is made for!”
Be sure to give clear, direct commands. Instead of “Could you please put your shoes on?” say: “Please put your shoes on.” This leaves no room for confusion and does not imply that following directions is a choice--“could you”.
► Ages 6 to 8
Timeouts and consequences are also effective discipline strategies for this age group.
Again, consistency is crucial, as is follow-through. Make good on any promises of discipline or else you risk undermining your authority. Children have to believe that you mean what you say. This is not to say you can’t give second chances or allow a certain margin of error, but for the most part, you should act on what you say.
Be careful not to make unrealistic threats of punishment in anger (“Slam that door and you’ll never watch a movie again!”), since not following through could weaken all your threats and authority. If you threaten to turn the car around and go home if the squabbling in the backseat doesn’t stop, make sure you do exactly that. The credibility you’ll gain with your children is much more valuable than a lost day-out.
Huge punishments may take away your power as a parent. If you ground your son or daughter for a month, your child may not feel motivated to change behaviors, because everything has already been taken away. It may help to set some goals, that children can meet, to earn back privileges that were taken away for misbehavior.
► Ages 9 to 12
Children in this age group — just as with all ages — can be disciplined with natural consequences. As they mature and request more independence and responsibility, teaching them to deal with the consequences of their behavior is an effective and appropriate method of discipline.
For example, if your fifth grader’s homework isn’t done before bedtime, should you make him or her stay up to do it, or even lend a hand yourself? Probably not — you’ll miss an opportunity to teach a key life lesson. If homework is incomplete, your child will go to school the next day without it and suffer the resulting bad grade.
It’s natural for parents to want to rescue children from mistakes, but in the long run they do children a favor by letting them fail sometimes. Children see what behaving improperly can mean and probably won’t make those mistakes again. However, if your child does not seem to be learning from natural consequences, set up some of your own to help change the behavior. Removing privileges such as electronics can be an effective consequence for this age group.
► Ages 13 and Up
By now you’ve laid the groundwork. Your child knows what’s expected and that you mean what you say about the penalties for bad behavior. Don’t let down your guard now — discipline is just as important for teens as it is for younger children. Just as with the 4-year-old who needs you to set a bedtime and enforce it, your teen needs boundaries, too.
Set up rules regarding homework, visits by friends, curfews, and dating and discuss them beforehand with your teenager so there will be no misunderstandings. Your teen will probably complain from time to time, but also will realize that you’re in control. Believe it or not, teens still want and need you to set limits and enforce order in their lives, even as you grant them greater freedom and responsibility.
When your teen does break a rule, taking away privileges may seem the best plan of action. While it’s fine to take away the car for a week, for example, be sure to also discuss why coming home an hour past curfew is unacceptable and worrisome.
Remember to give a teenager some control over things. Not only will this limit the number of power struggles you have, it will help your teen respect the decisions that you do need to make. You could allow a younger teen to make decisions concerning school clothes, hair styles, or even the condition of his or her room. As your teen gets older, that realm of control might be extended to include an occasional relaxed curfew.
It’s also important to focus on the positives. For example, have your teen earn a later curfew by demonstrating positive behavior, instead of setting an earlier curfew as punishment for irresponsible behavior. You can always use the negative approach and punish, just as a doctor can always amputate the patient’s leg, but less negative measures are tried first.
Here are some ideas about how to vary your approach to discipline to best fit your family.
► Ages 0 to 2
Babies and toddlers are naturally curious. So it’s wise to eliminate temptations and “no-nos” — items such as TVs and video equipment, stereos, jewelry, fragile objects, and especially cleaning supplies and medicines should be kept well out of reach.
When your crawling baby, or roving toddler, heads toward an unacceptable or dangerous play object, calmly say “No” and, either remove your child from the area, or distract him or her with an appropriate activity.
Timeouts can be effective discipline for toddlers. A child who has been hitting, biting, or throwing food, for example, should be told why the behavior is unacceptable and taken to a designated timeout area — a kitchen chair or bottom stair — for a minute or two to calm down (longer timeouts are not effective for toddlers).
It’s important to not spank, hit, or slap a child at this age. Babies and toddlers are especially unlikely to be able to make any connection between their behavior and physical punishment―they do not have the power of reasoning yet. They will only feel the pain of the hit.
And don’t forget that children learn by watching adults, particularly their parents. Make sure your behavior is role-model material. You’ll make a much stronger impression by putting your own belongings away rather than just issuing orders to your child to pick up toys while your stuff is left strewn around.
► Ages 3 to 5
As your child grows and begins to understand the connection between actions and consequences, make sure you start communicating the rules of your family’s home.
Explain to children what you expect of them before you punish them for a behavior. The first time your 3-year-old uses crayons to decorate the living room wall, discuss why that’s not allowed and what will happen if your child does it again (for instance, your child will have to help clean the wall and will not be able to use the crayons for the rest of the day). If the wall gets decorated again a few days later, issue a reminder that crayons are for paper only and then enforce the consequences. Spanking—much like capital punishment, should be the last resort. Too many parents use spanking as a kind of “one spank fits all misbehavior” as in “one size fits all”.
The earlier that parents establish this kind of “I set the rules and you’re expected to listen or accept the consequences” standard, the better for everyone. Although it’s sometimes easier for parents to ignore occasional bad behavior or not follow through on some threatened punishment, this sets a bad precedent. Nature does not act that way—every time you pick-up a hot gridiron with your bare hands, it will burn you and give you pain without exceptions. Empty threats undermine your authority as a parent, and make it more likely that children will test limits. Consistency is the key to effective discipline, and it’s important for parents to decide (together, if you are not a single parent) what the rules are and then uphold them. Writing-out the rules and a variety of punishments in increasing degrees, is not a bad idea.
While you become clear on what behaviors will be punished, don’t forget to reward good behaviors. Don’t underestimate the positive effect that your praise can have — discipline is not just about punishment, but also about recognizing good behavior. For example, saying: “I’m proud of you for sharing your toys with others” is usually more effective than punishing a child who didn’t share. And be specific when giving praise rather than just saying “Good job!” You want to make it clear which behaviors you liked. This makes them more likely to happen in the future — the more attention we give to a behavior, the more likely it is to continue.
If your child continues an unacceptable behavior, no matter what you do, try making a chart with a box for each day of the week. Decide how many times your child can misbehave in minor matters before a punishment kicks in or how long the proper behavior must be seen before it is rewarded. The more a child abuses this policy, the less tolerance is shown to that child. Post the chart on the refrigerator and then track the good and unacceptable behaviors every day. This will give your child (and you) a concrete look at how it’s going. Once this begins to work, praise your child for learning to control misbehavior and, especially, for overcoming any stubborn problem.
Timeouts also can work well for children at this age. Pick a suitable timeout place, such as a chair or bottom step, that’s free of distractions. Remember, getting sent to your room isn’t effective if a computer, TV, or games are there. Also, a timeout is time away from any type of reinforcement. So your child shouldn’t get any attention from you while in a timeout — including talking, eye contact, etc.
Be sure to consider the length of time that will work best for your child. Experts say 1 minute for each year of age is a good rule of thumb; others recommend using the timeout until the child is calmed down (to teach self-regulation). Make sure that if a timeout happens because your child didn’t follow directions, you follow through with the direction after the timeout.
It’s important to tell children what the right thing to do is, not just to say what the wrong thing is. For example, instead of saying “Don’t jump on the couch,” try “Floors are made for standing and walking-on, couches are made for sitting-on! Please sit on the couch, that is what it is made for!”
Be sure to give clear, direct commands. Instead of “Could you please put your shoes on?” say: “Please put your shoes on.” This leaves no room for confusion and does not imply that following directions is a choice--“could you”.
► Ages 6 to 8
Timeouts and consequences are also effective discipline strategies for this age group.
Again, consistency is crucial, as is follow-through. Make good on any promises of discipline or else you risk undermining your authority. Children have to believe that you mean what you say. This is not to say you can’t give second chances or allow a certain margin of error, but for the most part, you should act on what you say.
Be careful not to make unrealistic threats of punishment in anger (“Slam that door and you’ll never watch a movie again!”), since not following through could weaken all your threats and authority. If you threaten to turn the car around and go home if the squabbling in the backseat doesn’t stop, make sure you do exactly that. The credibility you’ll gain with your children is much more valuable than a lost day-out.
Huge punishments may take away your power as a parent. If you ground your son or daughter for a month, your child may not feel motivated to change behaviors, because everything has already been taken away. It may help to set some goals, that children can meet, to earn back privileges that were taken away for misbehavior.
► Ages 9 to 12
Children in this age group — just as with all ages — can be disciplined with natural consequences. As they mature and request more independence and responsibility, teaching them to deal with the consequences of their behavior is an effective and appropriate method of discipline.
For example, if your fifth grader’s homework isn’t done before bedtime, should you make him or her stay up to do it, or even lend a hand yourself? Probably not — you’ll miss an opportunity to teach a key life lesson. If homework is incomplete, your child will go to school the next day without it and suffer the resulting bad grade.
It’s natural for parents to want to rescue children from mistakes, but in the long run they do children a favor by letting them fail sometimes. Children see what behaving improperly can mean and probably won’t make those mistakes again. However, if your child does not seem to be learning from natural consequences, set up some of your own to help change the behavior. Removing privileges such as electronics can be an effective consequence for this age group.
► Ages 13 and Up
By now you’ve laid the groundwork. Your child knows what’s expected and that you mean what you say about the penalties for bad behavior. Don’t let down your guard now — discipline is just as important for teens as it is for younger children. Just as with the 4-year-old who needs you to set a bedtime and enforce it, your teen needs boundaries, too.
Set up rules regarding homework, visits by friends, curfews, and dating and discuss them beforehand with your teenager so there will be no misunderstandings. Your teen will probably complain from time to time, but also will realize that you’re in control. Believe it or not, teens still want and need you to set limits and enforce order in their lives, even as you grant them greater freedom and responsibility.
When your teen does break a rule, taking away privileges may seem the best plan of action. While it’s fine to take away the car for a week, for example, be sure to also discuss why coming home an hour past curfew is unacceptable and worrisome.
Remember to give a teenager some control over things. Not only will this limit the number of power struggles you have, it will help your teen respect the decisions that you do need to make. You could allow a younger teen to make decisions concerning school clothes, hair styles, or even the condition of his or her room. As your teen gets older, that realm of control might be extended to include an occasional relaxed curfew.
It’s also important to focus on the positives. For example, have your teen earn a later curfew by demonstrating positive behavior, instead of setting an earlier curfew as punishment for irresponsible behavior. You can always use the negative approach and punish, just as a doctor can always amputate the patient’s leg, but less negative measures are tried first.
Article 10
12 Easy Steps to Make a Delinquent
(taken from the Police Department, Houston, Texas)
12 Easy Steps to Make a Delinquent
(taken from the Police Department, Houston, Texas)
(1) Begin, with infancy, to give him everything he wants. In this way he will grow up thinking the world owes him a living.
(2) When he picks up “bad” or “dirty” words, laugh at him. That will make him think he is cute. He will run off and pick up some other words that will blow-off your head.
(3) Never give him any spiritual training until he is 21, and then let him decide for himself. By the same logic, never teach him the English language. Maybe when he is old enough, he may want to speak Bantu instead!
(4) Praise him, in his presence, to all neighbors; show him how much smarter he is than the neighbors= children.
(5) Avoid the use of the word “wrong.” It may develop in the child a “guilt complex.” This will prepare him to believe whenever he is punished, later on, for wrong-doing, that it is because society is against him and he is being persecuted.
(6) Pick up everything after him: his shoes, his books, his clothes. Do everything for him, so that he will be experienced in throwing burdens on others.
(7) Let him read everything he wants. Have no concern whatsoever for what goes into his mind. Provide him with sterilized cups for his lips, but let his brain drink out of any dirty container for words and ideas.
(8) Quarrel frequently in the presence of your children. In that way they will be prepared for broken homes later on.
(9) Give him all the spending-money he wants; never let him earn his own.
(10) Satisfy every craving of the child for food, drinks, and everything that has to do with the sense of taste and touch, gratifying every sensual desire.
(11) Take his side against police, teachers and neighbors. They are all prejudiced against your little child.
(12) When he gets into real trouble, always defend yourself and say: “I never could do anything with him.”
(2) When he picks up “bad” or “dirty” words, laugh at him. That will make him think he is cute. He will run off and pick up some other words that will blow-off your head.
(3) Never give him any spiritual training until he is 21, and then let him decide for himself. By the same logic, never teach him the English language. Maybe when he is old enough, he may want to speak Bantu instead!
(4) Praise him, in his presence, to all neighbors; show him how much smarter he is than the neighbors= children.
(5) Avoid the use of the word “wrong.” It may develop in the child a “guilt complex.” This will prepare him to believe whenever he is punished, later on, for wrong-doing, that it is because society is against him and he is being persecuted.
(6) Pick up everything after him: his shoes, his books, his clothes. Do everything for him, so that he will be experienced in throwing burdens on others.
(7) Let him read everything he wants. Have no concern whatsoever for what goes into his mind. Provide him with sterilized cups for his lips, but let his brain drink out of any dirty container for words and ideas.
(8) Quarrel frequently in the presence of your children. In that way they will be prepared for broken homes later on.
(9) Give him all the spending-money he wants; never let him earn his own.
(10) Satisfy every craving of the child for food, drinks, and everything that has to do with the sense of taste and touch, gratifying every sensual desire.
(11) Take his side against police, teachers and neighbors. They are all prejudiced against your little child.
(12) When he gets into real trouble, always defend yourself and say: “I never could do anything with him.”
Article 11
Dare to Discipline
(an extract from the book of the same name by Dr. James Dobson)
Dare to Discipline
(an extract from the book of the same name by Dr. James Dobson)
I’ll never forget a mother in that predicament who asked for my help in handling her defiant three-year-old daughter, Sandy. She realized that her tiny little girl had hopelessly beaten her in a contest of wills, and the child had become a tyrant and a dictator. On the afternoon prior to our conversation, an incident occurred which was typical of Sandy’s way of doing business. The mother (I’ll call her Mrs. Nichols) put the youngster down for a nap, but knew it was unlikely she would stay in bed. Sandy was not accustomed to doing anything she didn’t fancy, and naptime was not on her list of fun things to do in the afternoon.
On this occasion, however, the child was more interested in antagonizing her mom than in merely having her own way. Sandy began to scream. She yelled loudly enough to upset the whole neighborhood, fraying Mrs. Nichols’ jangled nerves. Then she tearfully demanded various things, including a glass of water.
At first Mrs. Nichols refused to comply with the orders, but she surrendered when Sandy’s screaming again reached a peak of intensity. As the glass of water was delivered, the mischievous child pushed it aside, refusing to drink because her mother had not brought it soon enough. Mrs. Nichols stood offering the water for a few minutes, then said she would take it back to the kitchen if Sandy did not drink by the time she counted to five.
Sandy set her jaw and waited through the count: “three ... four ... five!” As Mrs. Nichols grasped the glass and walked toward the kitchen, the child screamed for the water. Sandy dangled her harassed mom back and forth like a yo-yo until she tired of the sport.
Mrs. Nichols and her little daughter are among the many casualties of an unworkable, illogical philosophy of child management which has long dominated the literature on this subject. This mother had read that a child will eventually respond to reason and forbearance, ruling out the need for firm leadership. She had been told to encourage the child’s rebellion because it offered a valuable release of hostility. She attempted to implement the recommendations of the experts who suggested that she verbalize the child’s feelings in a moment of conflict: “You want the water but you’re angry because I brought it too late”. . . “You don’t want me to take the water back to the kitchen. You don’t like me because I make you take naps.” She had also been taught that conflicts between parent and child were to be perceived As misunderstandings or differences in viewpoint.
Unfortunately, Mrs. Nichols and her advisors were wrong! She and her child were involved in no simple difference of opinion: she was being challenged, mocked, and defied by her daughter. No heart-to-heart talk would resolve this nose-to-nose confrontation, because the real issue was totally unrelated to water or the nap or other aspects of the particular circumstances. ‘Me actual meaning behind this conflict and a hundred others was simply this: Sandy was brazenly rejecting the authority of her mother. The way Mrs. Nichols handled these confrontations would determine the nature of their future relationship, especially during the adolescent years.
Much has been written about the dangers of harsh, oppressive, unloving discipline; these warnings are valid and should be heeded. However, the consequences of oppressive discipline have been cited as justification for the abdication of leadership. That is foolish. There are times when a strong-willed child will clench his little fists and dare his parents to accept his challenges. He is not motivated by frustration or inner hostility, as it is often supposed. He merely wants to know where the boundaries he and who’s available to enforce them.
Many well-meaning specialists have waved the banner of tolerance, but offered no solution for defiance. They have stressed the importance of parental understanding of the child, and I concur. But we need to teach children that they have a few things to learn about their parents, too!
Mrs. Nichols and all her contemporaries need to know how to set limits, and what to do when defiant behavior occurs. This disciplinary activity must take place within the framework of love and affection, which is often difficult for parents who view these roles as contradictory. Dare to Discipline is addressed, in part, to this vital aspect of raising healthy, respectful, happy children.
The term “discipline” is not limited to the context of confrontation, and neither is this book. Children also need to be taught self-discipline and responsible behavior. They need assistance in learning how to handle the challenges and obligations of living. They must learn the art of self-control. They should be equipped with the personal strength needed to meet the demands imposed on them by their school, peer group, and later adult responsibilities.
Mere are those who believe these characteristics cannot be taught-that the best we can do is send children down the path of least resistance, sweeping aside the hurdles during their formative years. The advocates of this laissez-faire philosophy would recommend that youngsters be allowed to fail in school if they choose ... or maintain their bedrooms like proverbial pigpens ... or let their puppies go hungry.
I reject this notion and have accumulated considerable evidence to refute it. Children thrive best in an atmosphere of genuine love, undergirded by reasonable, consistent discipline. In a day of widespread drug usage, immorality, sexually transmitted diseases, vandalism, and violence, we must not depend on hope and luck to fashion the critical attitudes we value in our children. Permissiveness has not simply failed as an approach to child rearing. It’s been a disaster for those who have tried it.
When properly applied, loving discipline works! It stimulates tender affection, made possible by mutual respect between a parent and a child. It bridges the gap which otherwise separates family members who should love and trust each other. It allows the God of our ancestors to be introduced to our beloved children. It permits teachers to do the kind of job in classrooms for which they are commissioned. It encourages a child to respect other people and live as a responsible, constructive citizen.
As might be expected, there is a price tag on these benefits: they require courage, consistency, conviction, diligence, and enthusiastic effort. In short, one must dare to discipline in an environment of unmitigated love. We’ll discuss the methods by which that can be accomplished in subsequent chapters.
Methods and philosophies of discipline have been the subject of heated debate and disagreement throughout the past seventy years. Psychologists and pediatricians and university professors have all gotten into the act, telling parents how to raise their kids properly. Unfortunately, many of these “experts” have been in direct contradiction with one another, spreading more heat than fight about a subject of great importance.
Perhaps that is why the pendulum has swung back and forth regularly between harsh, oppressive control and the unstructured permissiveness we saw in the mid-twentieth century. It is time we realized that both extremes leave their characteristic scars on the lives of young victims, and I would be hard pressed to say which is more damaging.
Let me say again with the strongest emphasis that aggressive, hard-nosed, “Mommie Dearest” kinds of discipline are destructive to kids and must not be tolerated. Parents who are cold and stern with their sons and daughters often leave them damaged for life. I could easily be misunderstood at this point, having authored this book in which I recommend (in chapter 4) the judicious use of corporal punishment under specific circumstances and limits. May all doubts be dispelled. I don’t believe in parental harshness. Period! Children are incredibly vulnerable to rejection, ridicule, criticism, and anger at home, and they deserve to grow up in an environment of safety, acceptance, and warmth.
We must acknowledge, as indicated earlier, that the opposite extreme is also damaging to children. In the absence of adult leadership, the child is his own master from his earliest babyhood. He thinks the world revolves around his heady empire, and he often has utter contempt and disrespect for those closest to him. Anarchy and chaos reign in his home, and his mother is often the most nervous, frustrated woman on her block. When the child is young, the mother is stranded at home because she is too embarrassed to take her little spitfire anywhere. It would be worth the hardships she endures if this condition produced healthy, secure children. It clearly does not.
Many of the writers offering their opinions on the subject of discipline in recent years have confused parents, stripping them of the ability to lead in their own homes. They have failed to acknowledge the desire of most youngsters to rule their own lives and prevail in the contest of wills that typically occurs between generations.
I believe that if it is desirable for children to be kind, appreciative, and pleasant, those qualities should be taught not hoped for. If we want to see honesty, truthfulness, and unselfishness in our offspring, then these characteristics should be the conscious objectives of our early instructional process. If it is important to produce respectful, responsible young citizens, then we should set out to mold them accordingly. The point is obvious: heredity does not equip a child with proper attitudes; children learn what they are taught. We cannot expect the coveted behavior to appear magically if we have not done our early homework.
The kind of advice Dr. Woodward and others have offered to mothers and fathers through the years has led to a type of paralysis in dealing with their kids. In the absence of “permission” to step in and lead, parents were left with only their anger and frustration in response to defiant behavior.
That thought immediately brings to mind a family I knew with four of the most unruly children I had ever met. These youngsters were the terrors of their neighborhood. They were disrespectful, loud, and aggressive. They roamed in and out of other people’s garages, helping themselves to tools and equipment. It became necessary for neighbors to remove the handles from outside water faucets, because these children enjoyed leaving the water running when the families were gone.
It was interesting to observe the method of discipline used by their mother, if only because it provided a memorable example of what didn’t work. Her system of controlling her brood boiled down to a simple formula. When they became too noisy or cantankerous in the backyard, she would rush out the door about once every hour and scream, “I have had it with you kids! I have just had it with you!” Then she would turn and go back into the house. The children never even glanced up at her. If they knew she was there they gave no indication of it. But she apparently felt it was sufficient to burst out the door Eke a cuckoo clock every so often and remind them that she was still on the job.
(Taken from Dr. James Dobson's Dare to Discipline)
On this occasion, however, the child was more interested in antagonizing her mom than in merely having her own way. Sandy began to scream. She yelled loudly enough to upset the whole neighborhood, fraying Mrs. Nichols’ jangled nerves. Then she tearfully demanded various things, including a glass of water.
At first Mrs. Nichols refused to comply with the orders, but she surrendered when Sandy’s screaming again reached a peak of intensity. As the glass of water was delivered, the mischievous child pushed it aside, refusing to drink because her mother had not brought it soon enough. Mrs. Nichols stood offering the water for a few minutes, then said she would take it back to the kitchen if Sandy did not drink by the time she counted to five.
Sandy set her jaw and waited through the count: “three ... four ... five!” As Mrs. Nichols grasped the glass and walked toward the kitchen, the child screamed for the water. Sandy dangled her harassed mom back and forth like a yo-yo until she tired of the sport.
Mrs. Nichols and her little daughter are among the many casualties of an unworkable, illogical philosophy of child management which has long dominated the literature on this subject. This mother had read that a child will eventually respond to reason and forbearance, ruling out the need for firm leadership. She had been told to encourage the child’s rebellion because it offered a valuable release of hostility. She attempted to implement the recommendations of the experts who suggested that she verbalize the child’s feelings in a moment of conflict: “You want the water but you’re angry because I brought it too late”. . . “You don’t want me to take the water back to the kitchen. You don’t like me because I make you take naps.” She had also been taught that conflicts between parent and child were to be perceived As misunderstandings or differences in viewpoint.
Unfortunately, Mrs. Nichols and her advisors were wrong! She and her child were involved in no simple difference of opinion: she was being challenged, mocked, and defied by her daughter. No heart-to-heart talk would resolve this nose-to-nose confrontation, because the real issue was totally unrelated to water or the nap or other aspects of the particular circumstances. ‘Me actual meaning behind this conflict and a hundred others was simply this: Sandy was brazenly rejecting the authority of her mother. The way Mrs. Nichols handled these confrontations would determine the nature of their future relationship, especially during the adolescent years.
Much has been written about the dangers of harsh, oppressive, unloving discipline; these warnings are valid and should be heeded. However, the consequences of oppressive discipline have been cited as justification for the abdication of leadership. That is foolish. There are times when a strong-willed child will clench his little fists and dare his parents to accept his challenges. He is not motivated by frustration or inner hostility, as it is often supposed. He merely wants to know where the boundaries he and who’s available to enforce them.
Many well-meaning specialists have waved the banner of tolerance, but offered no solution for defiance. They have stressed the importance of parental understanding of the child, and I concur. But we need to teach children that they have a few things to learn about their parents, too!
Mrs. Nichols and all her contemporaries need to know how to set limits, and what to do when defiant behavior occurs. This disciplinary activity must take place within the framework of love and affection, which is often difficult for parents who view these roles as contradictory. Dare to Discipline is addressed, in part, to this vital aspect of raising healthy, respectful, happy children.
The term “discipline” is not limited to the context of confrontation, and neither is this book. Children also need to be taught self-discipline and responsible behavior. They need assistance in learning how to handle the challenges and obligations of living. They must learn the art of self-control. They should be equipped with the personal strength needed to meet the demands imposed on them by their school, peer group, and later adult responsibilities.
Mere are those who believe these characteristics cannot be taught-that the best we can do is send children down the path of least resistance, sweeping aside the hurdles during their formative years. The advocates of this laissez-faire philosophy would recommend that youngsters be allowed to fail in school if they choose ... or maintain their bedrooms like proverbial pigpens ... or let their puppies go hungry.
I reject this notion and have accumulated considerable evidence to refute it. Children thrive best in an atmosphere of genuine love, undergirded by reasonable, consistent discipline. In a day of widespread drug usage, immorality, sexually transmitted diseases, vandalism, and violence, we must not depend on hope and luck to fashion the critical attitudes we value in our children. Permissiveness has not simply failed as an approach to child rearing. It’s been a disaster for those who have tried it.
When properly applied, loving discipline works! It stimulates tender affection, made possible by mutual respect between a parent and a child. It bridges the gap which otherwise separates family members who should love and trust each other. It allows the God of our ancestors to be introduced to our beloved children. It permits teachers to do the kind of job in classrooms for which they are commissioned. It encourages a child to respect other people and live as a responsible, constructive citizen.
As might be expected, there is a price tag on these benefits: they require courage, consistency, conviction, diligence, and enthusiastic effort. In short, one must dare to discipline in an environment of unmitigated love. We’ll discuss the methods by which that can be accomplished in subsequent chapters.
Methods and philosophies of discipline have been the subject of heated debate and disagreement throughout the past seventy years. Psychologists and pediatricians and university professors have all gotten into the act, telling parents how to raise their kids properly. Unfortunately, many of these “experts” have been in direct contradiction with one another, spreading more heat than fight about a subject of great importance.
Perhaps that is why the pendulum has swung back and forth regularly between harsh, oppressive control and the unstructured permissiveness we saw in the mid-twentieth century. It is time we realized that both extremes leave their characteristic scars on the lives of young victims, and I would be hard pressed to say which is more damaging.
Let me say again with the strongest emphasis that aggressive, hard-nosed, “Mommie Dearest” kinds of discipline are destructive to kids and must not be tolerated. Parents who are cold and stern with their sons and daughters often leave them damaged for life. I could easily be misunderstood at this point, having authored this book in which I recommend (in chapter 4) the judicious use of corporal punishment under specific circumstances and limits. May all doubts be dispelled. I don’t believe in parental harshness. Period! Children are incredibly vulnerable to rejection, ridicule, criticism, and anger at home, and they deserve to grow up in an environment of safety, acceptance, and warmth.
We must acknowledge, as indicated earlier, that the opposite extreme is also damaging to children. In the absence of adult leadership, the child is his own master from his earliest babyhood. He thinks the world revolves around his heady empire, and he often has utter contempt and disrespect for those closest to him. Anarchy and chaos reign in his home, and his mother is often the most nervous, frustrated woman on her block. When the child is young, the mother is stranded at home because she is too embarrassed to take her little spitfire anywhere. It would be worth the hardships she endures if this condition produced healthy, secure children. It clearly does not.
Many of the writers offering their opinions on the subject of discipline in recent years have confused parents, stripping them of the ability to lead in their own homes. They have failed to acknowledge the desire of most youngsters to rule their own lives and prevail in the contest of wills that typically occurs between generations.
I believe that if it is desirable for children to be kind, appreciative, and pleasant, those qualities should be taught not hoped for. If we want to see honesty, truthfulness, and unselfishness in our offspring, then these characteristics should be the conscious objectives of our early instructional process. If it is important to produce respectful, responsible young citizens, then we should set out to mold them accordingly. The point is obvious: heredity does not equip a child with proper attitudes; children learn what they are taught. We cannot expect the coveted behavior to appear magically if we have not done our early homework.
The kind of advice Dr. Woodward and others have offered to mothers and fathers through the years has led to a type of paralysis in dealing with their kids. In the absence of “permission” to step in and lead, parents were left with only their anger and frustration in response to defiant behavior.
That thought immediately brings to mind a family I knew with four of the most unruly children I had ever met. These youngsters were the terrors of their neighborhood. They were disrespectful, loud, and aggressive. They roamed in and out of other people’s garages, helping themselves to tools and equipment. It became necessary for neighbors to remove the handles from outside water faucets, because these children enjoyed leaving the water running when the families were gone.
It was interesting to observe the method of discipline used by their mother, if only because it provided a memorable example of what didn’t work. Her system of controlling her brood boiled down to a simple formula. When they became too noisy or cantankerous in the backyard, she would rush out the door about once every hour and scream, “I have had it with you kids! I have just had it with you!” Then she would turn and go back into the house. The children never even glanced up at her. If they knew she was there they gave no indication of it. But she apparently felt it was sufficient to burst out the door Eke a cuckoo clock every so often and remind them that she was still on the job.
(Taken from Dr. James Dobson's Dare to Discipline)
Article 12
Developing Respect for Parents is Crucial in Child Management
(an extract from the book of the same name by Dr. James Dobson)
Developing Respect for Parents is Crucial in Child Management
(an extract from the book of the same name by Dr. James Dobson)
It is imperative that a child learns to respect his parents-not to satisfy their egos, but because his relationship with them provides the basis for his later attitude toward all other people. His early view of parental authority becomes the cornerstone of his future outlook on school authority, law enforcement officers, employers, and others with whom he will eventually live and work. ‘Me parent-child relationship is the first and most important social interaction a youngster will have, and the flaws and knots experienced there can often be seen later in life.
Respect for parents must be maintained for another equally important reason. If you want your child to accept your values when he reaches his teen years, then you must be worthy of his respect during his younger days. When a child can successfully defy his parents during his first fifteen years, laughing in their faces and stubbornly flouting their authority, he develops a natural contempt for them.
“Stupid old Mom and Dad! I have them wound around my little finger. Sure they love me, but I really think they’re afraid of me.” A child may not utter these words, but he feels them each time he outsmarts his elders and wins the confrontations and battles. Later he is likely to demonstrate his disrespect in a more blatant manner. Viewing his parents as being unworthy of his respect, he may very well reject every vestige of their philosophy and faith.
This factor is also of vital importance to Christian parents who wish to transmit their love for Jesus Christ to their sons and daughters. Why? Because young children typically identify their parents ... and especially their fathers ... with God. Therefore, if Mom and Dad are not worthy of respect, then neither are their morals, their country, their values and beliefs, or even their religious faith.
I was shocked to see this close identification between God and me in the mind of our son when he was two years old. Ryan had watched his mother and me pray before we ate each meal, but he had never been asked to say grace. One day when I was out of town on a business trip, Shirley spontaneously turned to the toddler and asked if he would like to pray before they ate. ‘Me invitation startled him, but he folded his little hands, bowed his head, and said, “I love you, Daddy. Amen.”
When I returned home and Shirley told me what had happened, the story unsettled me. I hadn’t realized the degree to which Ryan linked me with his “Heavenly Father.” I wasn’t even sure I wanted to stand in those shoes. It was too big a job, and I didn’t want the responsibility. But I had no choice, nor do you. God has given us the assignment of representing Him during the formative years of parenting. That’s why it is so critically important for us to acquaint our kids with God’s two predominant natures ... His unfathomable love and His justice. If we love our children but permit them to treat us disrespectfully and with disdain, we have distorted their understanding of the Father. On the other hand, if we are rigid disciplinarians who show no love, we have tipped the scales in the other direction. What we teach our children about the Lord is a function, to some degree, of how we model love and discipline in our relationship with them. Scary, huh?
The issue of respect is also useful in guiding parents’ interpretation of given behavior. First, they should decide whether an undesirable act represents a direct challenge to their authority ... to their leadership position as the father or mother. The form of disciplinary action they take should depend on the result of that evaluation.
For example, suppose little Chris is acting silly in the living room and falls into a table, breaking many expensive china cups and other trinkets. Or suppose Wendy loses her bicycle or leaves her mother’s coffeepot out in the rain. These are acts of childish irresponsibility and should be handled as such. Perhaps the parent will ignore the event or maybe have the child work to pay for the losses-depending on his age and maturity, of course.
However, these examples do not constitute direct challenges to authority. They do not emanate from willful, haughty disobedience and therefore should not result in serious discipline. In my opinion, spankings (which we will discuss later) should be reserved for the moment a child (between the age of eighteen months to ten years old) expresses to parents a defiant “I will not!” or “You shut up!” When youngsters convey this kind of stiff-necked rebellion, you must be willing to respond to the challenge immediately. When nose-to-nose confrontation occurs between you and your child, it is not the time to discuss the virtues of obedience. It is not the occasion to send him to his room to pout. Nor is it appropriate to postpone disciplinary measures until your tired spouse plods home from work.
You have drawn a fine in the dirt, and the child has deliberately flopped his bony little toe across it. Who is going to win? Who has the most courage? Who is in charge here? If you do not conclusively answer these questions for your strong-willed children, they will precipitate other battles designed to ask them again and again. It is the ultimate paradox of childhood that youngsters want to be led, but insist that their parents earn the right to lead them.
When mothers and fathers fail to take charge in moments of challenge, they create for themselves and their families a potential lifetime of heartache. That’s what happened in the case of the Holloways, who were the parents of a teen named Becky (not their real names). Mr. Holloway came to see me in desperation one afternoon and related the cause for his concern. Becky had never been required to obey or respect her parents, and her early years were a strain on the entire family. Mrs. Holloway was confident Becky would eventually become more manageable, but that never happened. She held her parents in utter contempt from her youngest childhood and was sullen, disrespectful, selfish, and uncooperative. Mr. and Mrs. Holloway did not feel they had the right to make demands on their daughter, so they smiled politely and pretended not to notice her horrid behavior. Their magnanimous attitude became more difficult to maintain as Becky steam-rolled into puberty and adolescence.
She was a perpetual malcontent, sneering at her family in disgust. Mr. and Mrs. Holloway were afraid to antagonize her in any way because she would throw the most violent tantrums imaginable. They were victims of emotional blackmail. They thought they could buy her cooperation, which led them to install a private telephone in her room. She accepted it without gratitude and accumulated a staggering bill during the first month of usage. They thought a party might make her happy, and Mrs. Holloway worked very hard to decorate the house and prepare refreshments. On the appointed evening, a mob of dirty, profane teens swarmed into the house, breaking and destroying the furnishings. During the course of the evening, Mrs. Holloway said something that angered Becky. The girl struck her mother and left her lying in a pool of blood in the bathroom.
Away from home at the time, Mr. Holloway returned to find his wife helpless on the floor; he located his unconcerned daughter in the backyard, dancing with friends. As he described for me the details of their recent nightmare, he spoke with tears in his eyes. His wife, he said, was still in the hospital contemplating her parental failures as she recovered from her wounds.
Parents like the Holloways often fail to understand how love and discipline interact to influence the attitudes of a child. These two aspects of a relationship are not opposites working against each other. They are two dimensions of the same quality. One demands the other. Disciplinary action is not an assault on parental love; it is a function of it. Appropriate punishment is not something parents do to a beloved child; it is something done for him or her. That simple understanding when Becky was younger could have spared the Holloways an adolescent nightmare.
Their attitude when Becky rebelled as a preschooler should have been, “I love you too much to let you behave like that.” For the small child, word pictures can help convey this message more clearly. The following is a story I used with our very young children when they crossed the fine of unacceptable behavior:
I knew of a little bird who was in his nest with his mommy. ‘Me mommy bird went off to find some worms to eat, and she told the little bird not to get out of the nest while she was gone. But the little bird didn’t mind her. He jumped out of the nest and fell to the ground where a big cat got him. When I tell you to mind me, it is because I know what is best for you, just as the mommy bird did with her baby bird. When I tell you to stay in the front yard, it’s because I don’t want you to run in the street and get hit by a car. I love you, and I don’t want anything to happen to you. If you don’t mind me, I’ll have to spank you to help you remember how important it is. Do you understand?
My own mother had an unusually keen understanding of good disciplinary procedures, as I have indicated. She was very tolerant of my childishness, and I found her reasonable on most issues. If I was late coming home from school and could explain what caused the delay, that was the end of the matter. If I didn’t get my work done, we could sit down and reach an agreement for future action. But there was one matter on which she was absolutely rigid: She did not tolerate sassiness. She knew that backtalk and what she called “lip” were a child’s most potent weapon to defiance and had to be discouraged. I learned very early that if I was going to launch a flippant attack on her, I had better be standing at least twelve feet away. This distance was necessary to avoid an instantaneous response-usually aimed at my backside.
The day I learned the importance of staying out of reach shines like a neon light in my mind. I made the costly mistake of sassing her when I was about four feet away. I knew I had crossed the line and wondered what she would do about it. It didn’t take long to find out. Mom wheeled around to grab something with which to express her displeasure, and her hand landed on a girdle. Those were the days when a girdle was lined with rivets and mysterious panels. She drew back and swung that abominable garment in my direction, and I can still hear it whistling through the air. The intended blow caught me across the chest, followed by a multitude of straps and buckles, wrapping themselves around my midsection. She gave me an entire thrashing with one blow! But from that day forward, I measured my words carefully when addressing my mother. I never spoke disrespectfully to her again, even when she was seventy-five years old.
I have shared that story many times through the years, to an interesting response. Most people found it funny and fully understood the innocuous meaning of that moment. A few others, who never met my mother and had no knowledge of her great love for me, quickly condemned her for the abusiveness of that event. One Christian psychologist even wrote a chapter in his book on the viciousness of that spanking. Another man in Wichita, Kansas, was so furious at me for telling the story that he refused to come hear me speak. Later he admitted he had misread the word girdle, thinking my mother had hit me with a griddle.
If you’re inclined to agree with the critics, please hear me out. I am the only person on earth who can report accurately the impact of my mother’s action. I’m the only one who lived it. And I’m here to tell you that the girdle-blow was an act of love! My mother would have laid down her life for me in a heartbeat, and I always knew it. She would not have harmed a hair on my fuzzy head. Yes, she was angry at my insolence, but her sudden reaction was a corrective maneuver. We both knew I richly deserved it. And that is why the momentary pain of that event did not assault my self-worth. Believe it or not, it made me feel loved. Take it or leave it, Dr. Psychologist, but that’s the truth.
Now let me say the obvious. I can easily see how the same setting could have represented profound rejection and hostility of the first order. If I had not known I was loved ... if I had not deserved the punishment ... if I had been frequently and unjustly struck for minor offenses ... I would have suffered serious damage from the same whirring girdle. The minor pain was not the critical variable. The meaning of the event is what mattered.
This single episode illustrates why it is so difficult to conduct definitive research on child-rearing practices. The critical factors are too subjective to be randomized and analyzed.
‘That complexity also explains why social workers seeking to rescue children from abusive homes often have such problems being fair. Many good parents in loving homes have lost custody of their sons and daughters because of evidence that is misinterpreted. For example, a dime-sized bruise on the buttocks of a fair-skinned child may or may not indicate an abusive situation. It all depends. In an otherwise secure and loving home, that bruise may have had no greater psychological impact than a skinned knee or a stubbed toe. Again, the significant issue is not the small abrasion; it is the meaning behind it-the way it occurred and the overall tone of the relationship. Nevertheless, grief-stricken parents have lost their children on the basis of a single piece of evidence of that nature. We call it parent abuse.
Please don’t write and accuse me of defending parents who routinely bruise and harm their children even in a minor way. It is wrong. It should not happen. But someone should have the courage to say we must look at the total relationship before removing a child from the security of a good home and not base a life-changing decision on a single bit of evidence.
Getting back to our theme of respect, let me emphasize that it will not work properly as a unilateral affair; it must run both ways. Parents cannot require their children to treat them with dignity if they will not do the same in return. Parents should be gentle with their child’s ego, never belittling or embarrassing him or her in front of friends. Discipline should usually be administered away from the curious eyes of gloating onlookers. Children should not be laughed at if it makes them uncomfortable. Their strong feelings and requests, even if foolish, should be given an honest appraisal. They should feel that their parents “really do care about me.” Self-esteem is the most fragile attribute in human nature. It can be damaged by very minor incidents, and its reconstruction is often difficult to engineer.
Thus, a father who is sarcastic and biting in his criticism of children cannot expect to receive genuine respect in return. His offspring might fear him enough to conceal their contempt. But revenge will often be sought in adolescence. Children know the wisdom of the old axiom, “Don’t mock the alligator until you are across the stream.” Thus, a vicious, toothy father may intimidate his household for a time, but if he does not demonstrate respect for its inhabitants, they may return his hostility when they reach the safety of early adulthood.
Respect for parents must be maintained for another equally important reason. If you want your child to accept your values when he reaches his teen years, then you must be worthy of his respect during his younger days. When a child can successfully defy his parents during his first fifteen years, laughing in their faces and stubbornly flouting their authority, he develops a natural contempt for them.
“Stupid old Mom and Dad! I have them wound around my little finger. Sure they love me, but I really think they’re afraid of me.” A child may not utter these words, but he feels them each time he outsmarts his elders and wins the confrontations and battles. Later he is likely to demonstrate his disrespect in a more blatant manner. Viewing his parents as being unworthy of his respect, he may very well reject every vestige of their philosophy and faith.
This factor is also of vital importance to Christian parents who wish to transmit their love for Jesus Christ to their sons and daughters. Why? Because young children typically identify their parents ... and especially their fathers ... with God. Therefore, if Mom and Dad are not worthy of respect, then neither are their morals, their country, their values and beliefs, or even their religious faith.
I was shocked to see this close identification between God and me in the mind of our son when he was two years old. Ryan had watched his mother and me pray before we ate each meal, but he had never been asked to say grace. One day when I was out of town on a business trip, Shirley spontaneously turned to the toddler and asked if he would like to pray before they ate. ‘Me invitation startled him, but he folded his little hands, bowed his head, and said, “I love you, Daddy. Amen.”
When I returned home and Shirley told me what had happened, the story unsettled me. I hadn’t realized the degree to which Ryan linked me with his “Heavenly Father.” I wasn’t even sure I wanted to stand in those shoes. It was too big a job, and I didn’t want the responsibility. But I had no choice, nor do you. God has given us the assignment of representing Him during the formative years of parenting. That’s why it is so critically important for us to acquaint our kids with God’s two predominant natures ... His unfathomable love and His justice. If we love our children but permit them to treat us disrespectfully and with disdain, we have distorted their understanding of the Father. On the other hand, if we are rigid disciplinarians who show no love, we have tipped the scales in the other direction. What we teach our children about the Lord is a function, to some degree, of how we model love and discipline in our relationship with them. Scary, huh?
The issue of respect is also useful in guiding parents’ interpretation of given behavior. First, they should decide whether an undesirable act represents a direct challenge to their authority ... to their leadership position as the father or mother. The form of disciplinary action they take should depend on the result of that evaluation.
For example, suppose little Chris is acting silly in the living room and falls into a table, breaking many expensive china cups and other trinkets. Or suppose Wendy loses her bicycle or leaves her mother’s coffeepot out in the rain. These are acts of childish irresponsibility and should be handled as such. Perhaps the parent will ignore the event or maybe have the child work to pay for the losses-depending on his age and maturity, of course.
However, these examples do not constitute direct challenges to authority. They do not emanate from willful, haughty disobedience and therefore should not result in serious discipline. In my opinion, spankings (which we will discuss later) should be reserved for the moment a child (between the age of eighteen months to ten years old) expresses to parents a defiant “I will not!” or “You shut up!” When youngsters convey this kind of stiff-necked rebellion, you must be willing to respond to the challenge immediately. When nose-to-nose confrontation occurs between you and your child, it is not the time to discuss the virtues of obedience. It is not the occasion to send him to his room to pout. Nor is it appropriate to postpone disciplinary measures until your tired spouse plods home from work.
You have drawn a fine in the dirt, and the child has deliberately flopped his bony little toe across it. Who is going to win? Who has the most courage? Who is in charge here? If you do not conclusively answer these questions for your strong-willed children, they will precipitate other battles designed to ask them again and again. It is the ultimate paradox of childhood that youngsters want to be led, but insist that their parents earn the right to lead them.
When mothers and fathers fail to take charge in moments of challenge, they create for themselves and their families a potential lifetime of heartache. That’s what happened in the case of the Holloways, who were the parents of a teen named Becky (not their real names). Mr. Holloway came to see me in desperation one afternoon and related the cause for his concern. Becky had never been required to obey or respect her parents, and her early years were a strain on the entire family. Mrs. Holloway was confident Becky would eventually become more manageable, but that never happened. She held her parents in utter contempt from her youngest childhood and was sullen, disrespectful, selfish, and uncooperative. Mr. and Mrs. Holloway did not feel they had the right to make demands on their daughter, so they smiled politely and pretended not to notice her horrid behavior. Their magnanimous attitude became more difficult to maintain as Becky steam-rolled into puberty and adolescence.
She was a perpetual malcontent, sneering at her family in disgust. Mr. and Mrs. Holloway were afraid to antagonize her in any way because she would throw the most violent tantrums imaginable. They were victims of emotional blackmail. They thought they could buy her cooperation, which led them to install a private telephone in her room. She accepted it without gratitude and accumulated a staggering bill during the first month of usage. They thought a party might make her happy, and Mrs. Holloway worked very hard to decorate the house and prepare refreshments. On the appointed evening, a mob of dirty, profane teens swarmed into the house, breaking and destroying the furnishings. During the course of the evening, Mrs. Holloway said something that angered Becky. The girl struck her mother and left her lying in a pool of blood in the bathroom.
Away from home at the time, Mr. Holloway returned to find his wife helpless on the floor; he located his unconcerned daughter in the backyard, dancing with friends. As he described for me the details of their recent nightmare, he spoke with tears in his eyes. His wife, he said, was still in the hospital contemplating her parental failures as she recovered from her wounds.
Parents like the Holloways often fail to understand how love and discipline interact to influence the attitudes of a child. These two aspects of a relationship are not opposites working against each other. They are two dimensions of the same quality. One demands the other. Disciplinary action is not an assault on parental love; it is a function of it. Appropriate punishment is not something parents do to a beloved child; it is something done for him or her. That simple understanding when Becky was younger could have spared the Holloways an adolescent nightmare.
Their attitude when Becky rebelled as a preschooler should have been, “I love you too much to let you behave like that.” For the small child, word pictures can help convey this message more clearly. The following is a story I used with our very young children when they crossed the fine of unacceptable behavior:
I knew of a little bird who was in his nest with his mommy. ‘Me mommy bird went off to find some worms to eat, and she told the little bird not to get out of the nest while she was gone. But the little bird didn’t mind her. He jumped out of the nest and fell to the ground where a big cat got him. When I tell you to mind me, it is because I know what is best for you, just as the mommy bird did with her baby bird. When I tell you to stay in the front yard, it’s because I don’t want you to run in the street and get hit by a car. I love you, and I don’t want anything to happen to you. If you don’t mind me, I’ll have to spank you to help you remember how important it is. Do you understand?
My own mother had an unusually keen understanding of good disciplinary procedures, as I have indicated. She was very tolerant of my childishness, and I found her reasonable on most issues. If I was late coming home from school and could explain what caused the delay, that was the end of the matter. If I didn’t get my work done, we could sit down and reach an agreement for future action. But there was one matter on which she was absolutely rigid: She did not tolerate sassiness. She knew that backtalk and what she called “lip” were a child’s most potent weapon to defiance and had to be discouraged. I learned very early that if I was going to launch a flippant attack on her, I had better be standing at least twelve feet away. This distance was necessary to avoid an instantaneous response-usually aimed at my backside.
The day I learned the importance of staying out of reach shines like a neon light in my mind. I made the costly mistake of sassing her when I was about four feet away. I knew I had crossed the line and wondered what she would do about it. It didn’t take long to find out. Mom wheeled around to grab something with which to express her displeasure, and her hand landed on a girdle. Those were the days when a girdle was lined with rivets and mysterious panels. She drew back and swung that abominable garment in my direction, and I can still hear it whistling through the air. The intended blow caught me across the chest, followed by a multitude of straps and buckles, wrapping themselves around my midsection. She gave me an entire thrashing with one blow! But from that day forward, I measured my words carefully when addressing my mother. I never spoke disrespectfully to her again, even when she was seventy-five years old.
I have shared that story many times through the years, to an interesting response. Most people found it funny and fully understood the innocuous meaning of that moment. A few others, who never met my mother and had no knowledge of her great love for me, quickly condemned her for the abusiveness of that event. One Christian psychologist even wrote a chapter in his book on the viciousness of that spanking. Another man in Wichita, Kansas, was so furious at me for telling the story that he refused to come hear me speak. Later he admitted he had misread the word girdle, thinking my mother had hit me with a griddle.
If you’re inclined to agree with the critics, please hear me out. I am the only person on earth who can report accurately the impact of my mother’s action. I’m the only one who lived it. And I’m here to tell you that the girdle-blow was an act of love! My mother would have laid down her life for me in a heartbeat, and I always knew it. She would not have harmed a hair on my fuzzy head. Yes, she was angry at my insolence, but her sudden reaction was a corrective maneuver. We both knew I richly deserved it. And that is why the momentary pain of that event did not assault my self-worth. Believe it or not, it made me feel loved. Take it or leave it, Dr. Psychologist, but that’s the truth.
Now let me say the obvious. I can easily see how the same setting could have represented profound rejection and hostility of the first order. If I had not known I was loved ... if I had not deserved the punishment ... if I had been frequently and unjustly struck for minor offenses ... I would have suffered serious damage from the same whirring girdle. The minor pain was not the critical variable. The meaning of the event is what mattered.
This single episode illustrates why it is so difficult to conduct definitive research on child-rearing practices. The critical factors are too subjective to be randomized and analyzed.
‘That complexity also explains why social workers seeking to rescue children from abusive homes often have such problems being fair. Many good parents in loving homes have lost custody of their sons and daughters because of evidence that is misinterpreted. For example, a dime-sized bruise on the buttocks of a fair-skinned child may or may not indicate an abusive situation. It all depends. In an otherwise secure and loving home, that bruise may have had no greater psychological impact than a skinned knee or a stubbed toe. Again, the significant issue is not the small abrasion; it is the meaning behind it-the way it occurred and the overall tone of the relationship. Nevertheless, grief-stricken parents have lost their children on the basis of a single piece of evidence of that nature. We call it parent abuse.
Please don’t write and accuse me of defending parents who routinely bruise and harm their children even in a minor way. It is wrong. It should not happen. But someone should have the courage to say we must look at the total relationship before removing a child from the security of a good home and not base a life-changing decision on a single bit of evidence.
Getting back to our theme of respect, let me emphasize that it will not work properly as a unilateral affair; it must run both ways. Parents cannot require their children to treat them with dignity if they will not do the same in return. Parents should be gentle with their child’s ego, never belittling or embarrassing him or her in front of friends. Discipline should usually be administered away from the curious eyes of gloating onlookers. Children should not be laughed at if it makes them uncomfortable. Their strong feelings and requests, even if foolish, should be given an honest appraisal. They should feel that their parents “really do care about me.” Self-esteem is the most fragile attribute in human nature. It can be damaged by very minor incidents, and its reconstruction is often difficult to engineer.
Thus, a father who is sarcastic and biting in his criticism of children cannot expect to receive genuine respect in return. His offspring might fear him enough to conceal their contempt. But revenge will often be sought in adolescence. Children know the wisdom of the old axiom, “Don’t mock the alligator until you are across the stream.” Thus, a vicious, toothy father may intimidate his household for a time, but if he does not demonstrate respect for its inhabitants, they may return his hostility when they reach the safety of early adulthood.
Article 13
Solving Marriage Problems
Solving Marriage Problems
It should go without saying that the grace of God is necessary for a successful marriage. Our Lord said: “Without Me―you can do nothing!” (John 15:5). Holy Scripture adds: “Unless the Lord build the house―they labor in vain that build it! Unless the Lord keep the city―he watcheth in vain that keepeth it!” (Psalm 126:1). St. Thomas Aquinas tells us that grace build on nature, grace perfects nature and grace elevates nature. Most marriages are failing because they are failing to turn to God; failing to pray to God; failing to use the sources of grace and failing to follow God’s advice and commands. In this article, we will look at―not so much the supernatural things―but some of the natural things. Why? Because, as the saying goes: “God helps those who help themselves!” If we fail to do things correctly on a natural level, failing to play our part, failing to put natural efforts into our relationships―then don’t expect God to “wave a magic wand” and give you a happy marriage!
It is most important to establish, preferably in the first year of marriage, machinery for solving problems and disputes. Those who have done so rarely run into serious difficulties in their marriages. The experience of marriage counselors has shown that most who must resort to counseling have never mastered the art of resolving tense situations. Those entering marriage or those whose marriage is beset with frictions, might consider the following practices:
1. Try to recognize your partner having the right to opinions, tastes and preferences which differ from yours.
2. If your partner shows hostility or resentment try to realize that few people are malicious and that your partner must be suffering internally very much.
3. Remember it is better “to lose the battle and win the war”― it is better sometimes to submit or agree than win a point and ruin a marriage.
4. Learn to understand your partner’s way of looking at a situation; with such understanding, malice and growing ill‑will usually will disappear.
5. Never attribute ulterior motives; more resentment broods over suspected motives than over differences themselves. Doing so without solid reasons for it, is also a sin of false suspicion or rash judgment.
6. When moody it is best to keep quiet; in all probability the wrong thing will be said and the situation will only deteriorate. At such times, speaking to God will help much more.
7. Don’t make decisions when emotionally upset; they will almost always be wrong and cause regret later.
8. A sense of humor can be a saving factor. Some can learn to laugh at the childishness into which they have drifted during an argument.
9. If your partner will not take offense or if there has been a prior understanding about it, leaving in the middle of an argument may save the situation.
10. Although such steps will eliminate quarrels, they will not resolve them. It is important, therefore, that as soon as feasible two partners in marriage try to talk out calmly and rationally the point of dispute. Such mature discussion kept on the intellectual level, is the supreme technique for solving problems.
11. Remember that a discussion is intellectual; when it degenerates to the emotional level, it becomes a quarrel.
12. To insure against quarreling try to select the strategic moment for reopening discussion. Such would usually be moments when both are relaxed and in a good humor; perhaps the tactful time is at a party or after an enjoyable day’s outing. Moments of fatigue or worry will not lend themselves to calm discussion. On the other hand, such discussion should take place as soon as possible. Shakespeare has well written:
“Resist beginnings: all too late the cure, When ills have gathered strength through long delay.”
13. Write it out. A letter to your partner will probably not be charged with emotionalism. He will read it calmly in your absence. In the process of your writing and quiet thinking you may often discover where the mistake really lies or that the whole matter is quite childish. Or perhaps, you may find that you are unable to write your complaints because they existed in your emotions and not in your partner.
14. Admitting one is wrong, though it is difficult and requires real maturity, will usually dissipate an argument and its attendant ill‑feelings almost immediately.
15. While partners must learn how to apologize, the art of accepting an apology gracefully is equally important.
16. Ideally speaking, small things should be ignored. In reality, most marriage breakdowns occur because of the accumulation of small things which were not resolved, which festered more sores and eventually grew into a cancer. Partners must recognize that nothing is too trivial to cause serious damage to a marriage if left unsolved. This is why one marriage expert has labeled small differences “tremendous trifles.”
17. Patience is a cardinal need especially in new marriages. Completely satisfactory adjustment is a process that comes only with the passage of time. A study of 818 spouses showed that among those married an average of 20 years, adjustment in some areas was a slow process. In sex relations only 52.7% agreed from the start; in spending family income, 56.2%; in social activities 67.1%; in in‑law relationships 68.6%; in religious activities 74% and mutual friends 76.4%.
18. Once a matter has been settled, the door should promptly and permanently be slammed on it. A serious mistake commonly made is to rehash old mistakes, continue grudges and “drag old skeletons out of the closet.” This shows genuine immaturity.
19. Efforts should be made to repair wrongs done and assuage hurt feelings. Expressions of affection, complimentary remarks, praise, gifts and the like will help here.
20. The Old Testament advised us never to let the sun set on our wrath. This might be paraphrased for marriage by urging that partners “never let the sun set on an argument.” Were this done, were all differences resolved, were small sores not left to fester deeper on the morrow―no couple would ever look for the divorce court. This practical technique has been more aptly and beautifully expressed in A Goodnight for Husbands and Wives.
“This day is almost done. When the night and morning meet it will be only an unalterable memory. So let no unkind word; no careless doubting thought; no guilty secret; no neglected duty; no wisp of jealous fog becloud its passing. For we belong to each other to have and to hold―and we are determined not to lose the keen sense of mutual appreciation which God has given us. To have is passive, and was consummated on our wedding day, but to hold is active and can never be quite finished so long as we both shall live. Now, as we put our arms around each other, in sincere and affectionate token of our deep and abiding love, we would lay aside all disturbing thoughts, all misunderstandings, all unworthiness. If things have gone awry, let neither of us lift an accusing finger, nor become entangled in the rationalization of self‑defense. Who is to blame is not important; only how shall we set the situation right. And so, serving and being served, loving and being loved, blessing and being blessed, we shall make a happy, peaceful home, where hearts shall never drop their leaves, but where we and our children shall learn to face life joyfully, fearlessly, triumphantly, so near as God shall give us grace.”
It is most important to establish, preferably in the first year of marriage, machinery for solving problems and disputes. Those who have done so rarely run into serious difficulties in their marriages. The experience of marriage counselors has shown that most who must resort to counseling have never mastered the art of resolving tense situations. Those entering marriage or those whose marriage is beset with frictions, might consider the following practices:
1. Try to recognize your partner having the right to opinions, tastes and preferences which differ from yours.
2. If your partner shows hostility or resentment try to realize that few people are malicious and that your partner must be suffering internally very much.
3. Remember it is better “to lose the battle and win the war”― it is better sometimes to submit or agree than win a point and ruin a marriage.
4. Learn to understand your partner’s way of looking at a situation; with such understanding, malice and growing ill‑will usually will disappear.
5. Never attribute ulterior motives; more resentment broods over suspected motives than over differences themselves. Doing so without solid reasons for it, is also a sin of false suspicion or rash judgment.
6. When moody it is best to keep quiet; in all probability the wrong thing will be said and the situation will only deteriorate. At such times, speaking to God will help much more.
7. Don’t make decisions when emotionally upset; they will almost always be wrong and cause regret later.
8. A sense of humor can be a saving factor. Some can learn to laugh at the childishness into which they have drifted during an argument.
9. If your partner will not take offense or if there has been a prior understanding about it, leaving in the middle of an argument may save the situation.
10. Although such steps will eliminate quarrels, they will not resolve them. It is important, therefore, that as soon as feasible two partners in marriage try to talk out calmly and rationally the point of dispute. Such mature discussion kept on the intellectual level, is the supreme technique for solving problems.
11. Remember that a discussion is intellectual; when it degenerates to the emotional level, it becomes a quarrel.
12. To insure against quarreling try to select the strategic moment for reopening discussion. Such would usually be moments when both are relaxed and in a good humor; perhaps the tactful time is at a party or after an enjoyable day’s outing. Moments of fatigue or worry will not lend themselves to calm discussion. On the other hand, such discussion should take place as soon as possible. Shakespeare has well written:
“Resist beginnings: all too late the cure, When ills have gathered strength through long delay.”
13. Write it out. A letter to your partner will probably not be charged with emotionalism. He will read it calmly in your absence. In the process of your writing and quiet thinking you may often discover where the mistake really lies or that the whole matter is quite childish. Or perhaps, you may find that you are unable to write your complaints because they existed in your emotions and not in your partner.
14. Admitting one is wrong, though it is difficult and requires real maturity, will usually dissipate an argument and its attendant ill‑feelings almost immediately.
15. While partners must learn how to apologize, the art of accepting an apology gracefully is equally important.
16. Ideally speaking, small things should be ignored. In reality, most marriage breakdowns occur because of the accumulation of small things which were not resolved, which festered more sores and eventually grew into a cancer. Partners must recognize that nothing is too trivial to cause serious damage to a marriage if left unsolved. This is why one marriage expert has labeled small differences “tremendous trifles.”
17. Patience is a cardinal need especially in new marriages. Completely satisfactory adjustment is a process that comes only with the passage of time. A study of 818 spouses showed that among those married an average of 20 years, adjustment in some areas was a slow process. In sex relations only 52.7% agreed from the start; in spending family income, 56.2%; in social activities 67.1%; in in‑law relationships 68.6%; in religious activities 74% and mutual friends 76.4%.
18. Once a matter has been settled, the door should promptly and permanently be slammed on it. A serious mistake commonly made is to rehash old mistakes, continue grudges and “drag old skeletons out of the closet.” This shows genuine immaturity.
19. Efforts should be made to repair wrongs done and assuage hurt feelings. Expressions of affection, complimentary remarks, praise, gifts and the like will help here.
20. The Old Testament advised us never to let the sun set on our wrath. This might be paraphrased for marriage by urging that partners “never let the sun set on an argument.” Were this done, were all differences resolved, were small sores not left to fester deeper on the morrow―no couple would ever look for the divorce court. This practical technique has been more aptly and beautifully expressed in A Goodnight for Husbands and Wives.
“This day is almost done. When the night and morning meet it will be only an unalterable memory. So let no unkind word; no careless doubting thought; no guilty secret; no neglected duty; no wisp of jealous fog becloud its passing. For we belong to each other to have and to hold―and we are determined not to lose the keen sense of mutual appreciation which God has given us. To have is passive, and was consummated on our wedding day, but to hold is active and can never be quite finished so long as we both shall live. Now, as we put our arms around each other, in sincere and affectionate token of our deep and abiding love, we would lay aside all disturbing thoughts, all misunderstandings, all unworthiness. If things have gone awry, let neither of us lift an accusing finger, nor become entangled in the rationalization of self‑defense. Who is to blame is not important; only how shall we set the situation right. And so, serving and being served, loving and being loved, blessing and being blessed, we shall make a happy, peaceful home, where hearts shall never drop their leaves, but where we and our children shall learn to face life joyfully, fearlessly, triumphantly, so near as God shall give us grace.”
Article 14
The Ideal Man
The Ideal Man
The ideal man is a man of Strength and Gentleness. This term I have taken from the Latin expression used to describe how God=s grace works: fortiter et suaviter (powerfully and gently). I know of no other expression which so adequately portrays the perfection of manhood.
The Strong Man
The ideal man has the strength and endurance. Foremost among them is his willingness to assume masculine burdens, to earn his bread by the sweat of his face. He provides for himself and family with pride as he fulfills this masculine duty. He delights in this opportunity to serve, and does so enthusiastically. He doesn’t face his responsibility sullenly, as though there were no escape. He is not looking to others to do what he should be doing. When his problems become difficult, he takes pride in trying to solve them. Only in emergencies does he look to others for solutions.
He shoulders this obligation, not only for the moral responsibility to do so, but because of the positive masculine feeling he has in doing it. If placed in a position where he cannot function in this important capacity, he is most uncomfortable. His acceptance of this responsibility adds substance to the faith his wife places in him when she leaves the security of her parents’ home to make her way with him. She must rely on his sense of duty to provide for her, to shield her from the harshness of the world, and to strengthen her in her new experience.
Not only does he assume responsibility for himself and family, but he is also a builder of society, a contributor to the welfare-of others. He recognizes the world’s urgent needs and, with a sense of social responsibility, contributes his measure to making the world a better place. He is not afraid of responsibility, even when it requires time, toil, and personal sacrifice. All this he does because he feels a moral obligation to others. He helps without complaint.
A man of strength is a masculine man. He is aggressive, determined, decisive, and independent. He is efficient in a man’s world, demanding quotas of himself in reaching his objectives. He is competent in a task, fearless and courageous in the face of difficulty, and master of a situation. He has convictions and steadfastly holds to these convictions. He sets high goals, goals which require dedication and patience. He is not afraid of strain and diligence. He rejects softness and timidity. When he has made a decision based on his best judgment, he is unbendable as a piece of steel. These qualities set him apart from women and weaker members of his own sex.
A man of strength has a sterling character. He remains steadfast to his convictions even under pressure. He is a man of honor and integrity. He is fair, just and honest in his dealings, possessing moral courage and self-dignity and those diamond traits which make a strong character. He is master of himself because he has learned to discipline himself. When subjected to pressures, he stands firm.
In addition to all of this, he has achieved a feeling of confidence and peace because of his victory over himself. And physically, the man of strength has a body of strength and skill.
The Gentle Man
The tender qualities include a man's gentleness, his tenderness, kindness, generosity, and patience. He is devoted to the care and protection of women and children. He understands and respects their gentle nature and recognizes it as a complement to his masculinity. He is chivalrous, attentive and respectful to women and has an ability to love with tenderness. He has an enthusiastic and youthful attitude of optimism which he maintains in spite of increasing years. Humility is also a part of the gentleness, subduing the masculine ego as his rough nature is refined.
In considering the function of the strength and gentleness combined, they may be compared to a large, tall building. The steel qualities relate to the sturdy framework of steel and concrete which tie the structure steadfastly together and anchors it to its foundation. Without this strong inner framework, the building would not hold nor function under the pressures of its use and outside forces. The gentleness relates to the building's decor, its art forms, its landscape and interior finishing which add softness and beauty to the otherwise stark and stern mass of steel and stone.
When properly blended, these traits of strength and gentleness comprise the ideal man, a masterpiece of creation and the greatest contribution to the well-being of society. The attributes characterized as steel are the framework of his being, demonstrating a steadfastness in purpose born of the self-respect he feels when he is true to himself . . . when the quality of his life is such that he can live comfortably with himself as his own best friend.
This produces confidence analogous to the strength of a bar of steel which is thoroughly refined and tested. When the qualities of gentleness are added, a masterpiece results. That firmness which otherwise might appear harsh is softened. It is not unlike the large, heavy hands which are trained to play the violin Such hands have the raw strength to crush the instrument in a moment, but there is no danger of such a thing, as the gentle strokes bring forth beautiful music with a softness and appreciation for the artistic. Both the strength and gentleness are necessary to produce a great character. There has never been a truly great man who was not a possessor of both.
Men Who Are Strength Only
Throughout history men who have had certain strong steel traits, but have been lacking in character, refinement, tenderness and other such qualities, they have not been great men. Such are some of the military geniuses and political leaders as Napoleon, Caesar, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini. The eminence these men achieved was not done without some merit.
It must be recognized that each possessed qualities which inspired confidence and trust, at least initially. By providing forceful leadership, an assurance of protection of the rights and interests of their people, and by doing it in a strong and confident manner, they won support. The virtues of an upright character were largely missing. Also missing were most of the qualities of gentleness. Yet they won support because of strong steel qualities.
Although strong steel qualities were sufficient to establish them in power, yet they were insufficient to sustain them for an extended time. The lack of character and the crudeness and coarseness of their lives was self-defeating. Instead of being numbered among the great, they are classified as enemies to mankind.
Men Who Are Only Gentle
There are scores of men throughout history who have been gentle men. Although they do not stand out as enemies to society, they do not stand out for anything else. They are nonentities, being remembered for nothing of note. Not being real men, they did not build a better world, nor were they adequate as family leaders.
Jesus Christ--the Ideal Man
Only such men as achieve a balance of the strength and gentleness stand securely on an unshakable pedestal. At the apex of this relatively small group of individuals stands Jesus Christ, who was the epitome of all that was good and strong. In no area was He lacking.
A study of His life reveals an intriguing demonstration of the strength and gentleness. He never lost sight of His responsibility to complete the work he was sent to do. He maintained His devotion to it until the end when He said, “It is finished!” He was a leader of men, women, and children ― true to His convictions until death. He had the moral courage to introduce ideals and standards which were in conflict with popular teachings of His day.
He dedicated His life to the service and salvation of others, lifting people to higher planes of thought and living. He was a builder of society. And He was masculine, possessing courage, determination, fearlessness, decisive judgment, and aggressiveness. He was skilled and masterful in a difficult situation, never afraid to face the hardness of his enemies.
Some artists have pictured Him as thin, effeminate and physically weak and shy. He was just the opposite, having a strong body, sufficient to drive the money changers from the temple and adequate to perform strenuous masculine tasks.
His character was spotless, built on the highest of moral principles and standards of perfection. He was eager and enthusiastic about life, promising, “I am come that ye may have life and that ye may have it more abundantly.”
Yet with all of His strength and courage, there was about Him a gentleness that drew to Him women and children. Women wept at His feet and children surrounded Him. With all this He had humility. Though He was worshiped as perfect, He denied His goodness, saying, “There is none good but the Father.” Yet with this humility there was a self-dignity which commanded respect. As He stood before the judgment of the high courts, He bore His false accusations valiantly and faced the scoffing multitudes with superb dignity.
The Strong Man
The ideal man has the strength and endurance. Foremost among them is his willingness to assume masculine burdens, to earn his bread by the sweat of his face. He provides for himself and family with pride as he fulfills this masculine duty. He delights in this opportunity to serve, and does so enthusiastically. He doesn’t face his responsibility sullenly, as though there were no escape. He is not looking to others to do what he should be doing. When his problems become difficult, he takes pride in trying to solve them. Only in emergencies does he look to others for solutions.
He shoulders this obligation, not only for the moral responsibility to do so, but because of the positive masculine feeling he has in doing it. If placed in a position where he cannot function in this important capacity, he is most uncomfortable. His acceptance of this responsibility adds substance to the faith his wife places in him when she leaves the security of her parents’ home to make her way with him. She must rely on his sense of duty to provide for her, to shield her from the harshness of the world, and to strengthen her in her new experience.
Not only does he assume responsibility for himself and family, but he is also a builder of society, a contributor to the welfare-of others. He recognizes the world’s urgent needs and, with a sense of social responsibility, contributes his measure to making the world a better place. He is not afraid of responsibility, even when it requires time, toil, and personal sacrifice. All this he does because he feels a moral obligation to others. He helps without complaint.
A man of strength is a masculine man. He is aggressive, determined, decisive, and independent. He is efficient in a man’s world, demanding quotas of himself in reaching his objectives. He is competent in a task, fearless and courageous in the face of difficulty, and master of a situation. He has convictions and steadfastly holds to these convictions. He sets high goals, goals which require dedication and patience. He is not afraid of strain and diligence. He rejects softness and timidity. When he has made a decision based on his best judgment, he is unbendable as a piece of steel. These qualities set him apart from women and weaker members of his own sex.
A man of strength has a sterling character. He remains steadfast to his convictions even under pressure. He is a man of honor and integrity. He is fair, just and honest in his dealings, possessing moral courage and self-dignity and those diamond traits which make a strong character. He is master of himself because he has learned to discipline himself. When subjected to pressures, he stands firm.
In addition to all of this, he has achieved a feeling of confidence and peace because of his victory over himself. And physically, the man of strength has a body of strength and skill.
The Gentle Man
The tender qualities include a man's gentleness, his tenderness, kindness, generosity, and patience. He is devoted to the care and protection of women and children. He understands and respects their gentle nature and recognizes it as a complement to his masculinity. He is chivalrous, attentive and respectful to women and has an ability to love with tenderness. He has an enthusiastic and youthful attitude of optimism which he maintains in spite of increasing years. Humility is also a part of the gentleness, subduing the masculine ego as his rough nature is refined.
In considering the function of the strength and gentleness combined, they may be compared to a large, tall building. The steel qualities relate to the sturdy framework of steel and concrete which tie the structure steadfastly together and anchors it to its foundation. Without this strong inner framework, the building would not hold nor function under the pressures of its use and outside forces. The gentleness relates to the building's decor, its art forms, its landscape and interior finishing which add softness and beauty to the otherwise stark and stern mass of steel and stone.
When properly blended, these traits of strength and gentleness comprise the ideal man, a masterpiece of creation and the greatest contribution to the well-being of society. The attributes characterized as steel are the framework of his being, demonstrating a steadfastness in purpose born of the self-respect he feels when he is true to himself . . . when the quality of his life is such that he can live comfortably with himself as his own best friend.
This produces confidence analogous to the strength of a bar of steel which is thoroughly refined and tested. When the qualities of gentleness are added, a masterpiece results. That firmness which otherwise might appear harsh is softened. It is not unlike the large, heavy hands which are trained to play the violin Such hands have the raw strength to crush the instrument in a moment, but there is no danger of such a thing, as the gentle strokes bring forth beautiful music with a softness and appreciation for the artistic. Both the strength and gentleness are necessary to produce a great character. There has never been a truly great man who was not a possessor of both.
Men Who Are Strength Only
Throughout history men who have had certain strong steel traits, but have been lacking in character, refinement, tenderness and other such qualities, they have not been great men. Such are some of the military geniuses and political leaders as Napoleon, Caesar, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini. The eminence these men achieved was not done without some merit.
It must be recognized that each possessed qualities which inspired confidence and trust, at least initially. By providing forceful leadership, an assurance of protection of the rights and interests of their people, and by doing it in a strong and confident manner, they won support. The virtues of an upright character were largely missing. Also missing were most of the qualities of gentleness. Yet they won support because of strong steel qualities.
Although strong steel qualities were sufficient to establish them in power, yet they were insufficient to sustain them for an extended time. The lack of character and the crudeness and coarseness of their lives was self-defeating. Instead of being numbered among the great, they are classified as enemies to mankind.
Men Who Are Only Gentle
There are scores of men throughout history who have been gentle men. Although they do not stand out as enemies to society, they do not stand out for anything else. They are nonentities, being remembered for nothing of note. Not being real men, they did not build a better world, nor were they adequate as family leaders.
Jesus Christ--the Ideal Man
Only such men as achieve a balance of the strength and gentleness stand securely on an unshakable pedestal. At the apex of this relatively small group of individuals stands Jesus Christ, who was the epitome of all that was good and strong. In no area was He lacking.
A study of His life reveals an intriguing demonstration of the strength and gentleness. He never lost sight of His responsibility to complete the work he was sent to do. He maintained His devotion to it until the end when He said, “It is finished!” He was a leader of men, women, and children ― true to His convictions until death. He had the moral courage to introduce ideals and standards which were in conflict with popular teachings of His day.
He dedicated His life to the service and salvation of others, lifting people to higher planes of thought and living. He was a builder of society. And He was masculine, possessing courage, determination, fearlessness, decisive judgment, and aggressiveness. He was skilled and masterful in a difficult situation, never afraid to face the hardness of his enemies.
Some artists have pictured Him as thin, effeminate and physically weak and shy. He was just the opposite, having a strong body, sufficient to drive the money changers from the temple and adequate to perform strenuous masculine tasks.
His character was spotless, built on the highest of moral principles and standards of perfection. He was eager and enthusiastic about life, promising, “I am come that ye may have life and that ye may have it more abundantly.”
Yet with all of His strength and courage, there was about Him a gentleness that drew to Him women and children. Women wept at His feet and children surrounded Him. With all this He had humility. Though He was worshiped as perfect, He denied His goodness, saying, “There is none good but the Father.” Yet with this humility there was a self-dignity which commanded respect. As He stood before the judgment of the high courts, He bore His false accusations valiantly and faced the scoffing multitudes with superb dignity.
Article 15
True and False Happiness
True and False Happiness
Ž“HAPPILY MARRIED” ... “HAPPY FAMILIES”
We often hear the expression “happily married” and happy family.” It conjures up in our minds an ideal, imaginary, utopian state, whereby there are no problems of note, where everybody loves one another, agrees with one another, obeys one another, as they live their days in an atmosphere of health, peace, joy and laughter, surrounded by an abundance of material goods, so that nothing is lacking for both and soul.
Upon examining a dictionary, you will find “happy” defined as cheerful, content, glad, delighted, pleased, fortuitous, fortunate, lucky, opportune. “Happiness” will be defined as good fortune; a state of well-being and contentment; a pleasurable satisfaction; felicity.
EVERYONE WANTS TO BE PERFECTLY HAPPY
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.1.] Article 7 ― St. Thomas says that All men have the ... same ultimate goal. This ... is complete and enduring satisfaction or fulfillment; such fulfillment is called happiness. But all men do not agree about the precise things in which their ... happiness is to be found. Some think to attain happiness by becoming rich, some by enjoying pleasures, some by exercising power, some by being praised and honored, and so on.
All men act in pursuance of their happiness, or in an endeavor to remove unhappiness. We seek those things which we rightly, but more often wrongly, think will lead to our happiness. We seek our comfort and wealth; we seek to be loved and liked, to be honored and well-known, we seek independence and power, we seek beauty, fitness and strength, we seek the best food and drink we can afford, we seek fun and laughter, we seek joy and peace.....yet once we possess these things, we are never satisfied, the happiness of possessing these things is never perfect, complete, lasting, safe and enduring.
The money may be stolen or lost. Our reputation can easily be rightly, or wrongly, smeared and destroyed. Our friends and loved ones can be fickle, and one day we are loved and liked, the next day we are not. Independence and power cannot be guaranteed by the greatest powers on Earth, let alone one tiny human being or a family. How many once beautiful, healthy, fit and strong persons are now old, sick, and weak, their beauty now fattened, grayed and crinkled. The more we have, the more we still want, yet the more we become riddled with fear and anxiety at losing these things.
WHERE PERFECT HAPPINESS IS NOT FOUND
► NOT IN BEING MILLIONAIRES [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 1 ― St. Thomas Aquinas says that “Man’s happiness is not to be found in wealth, natural wealth which serves his normal needs (such as food, clothing, housing), or artificial wealth which can provide the items of natural wealth, that is, money. Wealth of any kind is a means for acquiring something else; it is a thing that serves; it does not fulfill.”
How many mistakenly make wealth their god and idol, mistakenly thinking that it will bring them perfect happiness. Of course, poverty can drive persons into sin and despair; therefore a certain wealth is necessary to be able to pursue one’s real happiness. But we often make a serious mistake in thinking what we want is what we need; whereas in reality, what we need is often much less than what we want.
In addition how many people misuse their wealth. Instead of it leading them to their true happiness, it merely leads them into sin. Such sins as miserliness, greed, deceit, cheating, fraud, wastefulness, gluttony, worldliness, etc. Their material wealth only creates supernatural debts, which will have to be paid in Purgatory or Hell. Thus what they thought would bring happiness, will only bring misery and pain.
How few are the wealthy who use their wealth in a godly manner; in performing directly or indirectly the spiritual and corporal works of mercy. In supporting the work of the Church, the propagation of the Faith, the work of the Missions, etc.
If we have any wealth, it comes from God’s Providence, no matter how hard our work has been, or how great our intelligence―for any success depends upon the cooperation of God’s Providence. He could have wrecked our acquisition of wealth through financial disaster, ill-health, closing rather than opening doors for us, or in any one of a thousand other ways. Wealth should be used to lead us to an even greater happiness, it is not a perfect happiness in itself.
In fact, there is something far more precious and valuable than any wealth man could lay his hands on; something that money cannot buy. That something is the grace of God. How many wealthy people would weep more over losing their wealth than they would weep over losing the grace of God. We cannot buy our way to Heaven or bribe St. Peter at the Pearly Gates. Yet the love and grace of God will open those gates for us.
So true is this, that three of the four Evangelists reported the following conversation of Our Lord’s in their Gospels:
“And a certain ruler asked Him, saying: ‘Good Master, what shall I do to possess everlasting life?’ And Jesus said to him: ‘Why dost thou call Me good? None is good but God alone! Thou knowest the commandments―Thou shalt not kill―Thou shalt not commit adultery―Thou shalt not steal―Thou shalt not bear false witness―Honor thy father and mother!’ Who said: ‘All these things have I kept from my youth!’ Which, when Jesus had heard, He said to him: ‘Yet one thing is wanting to thee! Sell all whatever thou hast and give to the poor: and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven. And come, follow Me!’ He, having heard these things, became sorrowful―for he was very rich. And Jesus seeing him become sorrowful, said: ‘How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the Kingdom of God―for it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God!’” (Luke 18:18-25; Matthew 19:16-24; Mark 10:17-25).
► NOT IN RECEIVING HONOR [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 2 ― St. Thomas Aquinas also says “Nor can man’s full happiness consist in honors bestowed because of some excellence in him. Any excellence in a man is in him because of some good already possessed; it means that he already has some degree of happiness. Honors come to him because of this happiness, and therefore honors cannot themselves be the constituting elements of perfect happiness.”
Those who are honored still find themselves pursuing a perfect lasting happiness. St. Thomas states that “It is impossible for happiness to consist in honor ... honor can result from happiness, but happiness cannot principally consist therein [in honor]” (idem.). The imperfect happiness of honor does not give perfect happiness. Their soul, though honored, still hungers for something more. They also know that honor, like a flower, can soon wane and be forgotten.
“Those who occupy positions of dignity have excellence of office ... they deserve respect and honor.” A searching for honor Our real concern should be the honor we have before the face of God and His angels. They see our true worth, our real value.
► NOT IN BEING POP STARS, FILM STARS, ETC. [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 3 ― Nor can man’s happiness be found in fame and glory. These, like honors bestowed, presuppose some degree of happiness already attained, and this they publicize and praise. Fame and glory are consequent upon an imperfect happiness, and are, in some sense, the product of it. They cannot, therefore, be the essential elements of perfect happiness.
► NOT IN BEING PRESIDENTS, BOSSES, LEADERS [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 4 ― Man’s perfect happiness cannot consist in the possession of power, for power is not a complete end, but a means; power is valuable according to the use to which it may be put. In a word, power looks on to something further; it cannot itself be the ultimate goal.
► NOT IN BEING SPORTSMEN, ATHLETES [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 5 ― Man’s ultimate happiness does not consist in goods of the body―life, health, strength, beauty, agility, etc. for these goods preserve the body. Merely to preserve life cannot be the end of life. Goods of the body are to be used by reason (intellect and will) somewhat as a ship is used by its master; the master does not use the ship merely to preserve the ship, but to carry profitable cargoes to desired ports. Thus it appears that the goods of the body are means, not complete ends. Besides, man is a rational being as well as a bodily being; he can never be completely fulfilled and satisfied by bodily goods.
► NOT IN BEING GENIUSES, CLEVER MEN [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 6 ― Pleasures, whether bodily or intellectual, cannot bring a man ultimate happiness. We have just seen that bodily things cannot be man’s perfect fulfillment. And mental enjoyments presuppose the end already attained; enjoyment follows upon possession of some good or end; what is consequent upon the end cannot itself be the end.
► NOT IN ANY QUALITIES OF THE SOUL [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 7 ― The goods of the soul―its essence, faculties, acts, habits, perfections―cannot constitute man’s ultimate end. Happiness is for the soul, and to be attained by the soul. The objective ultimate happiness is something outside the soul, which the soul seeks to bring into itself and possess subjectively. Hence this ultimate end is not the soul itself, nor the goods belonging to the soul.
► NOT IN ANY CREATED, MATERIAL GOODS [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 8 ― Indeed, no created good can give man perfect happiness. Only the essential, universal, and boundless good can bring man complete and unfading fulfillment. No created good is universal, essential, and boundless; only the uncreated good can be the ultimate end of man. And this uncreated good is God.
► PERFECT, LASTING HAPPINESS CAN ONLY BE FOUND IN GOD ALONE [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.1.] Article 8 ― All men seek ... happiness. Now, the objective last end of man is the object which, when possessed, will give him happiness. The objective last end of man ... is the infinite good. The infinite good is God.
HOW WE SHOULD VALUE SUPERNATURAL & NATURAL THINGS
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia Q.82.] Article 3 ― For when a good is greater or nobler than the soul itself, it is better to will it (that is, love it) than merely to know it; thus it is a better thing to love God than simply to know God. But when a good is less noble than the soul, intellect, with respect to this good, is superior to the will; thus to know material things is better than to love them.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.4.] art. 7. External goods, such as food, drink, and property, which are required in due measure for earthly happiness, will not be required at all in Heaven. When souls and bodies are reunited at the general resurrection, human bodies will be spiritualized and will no longer have material or animal needs.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.4.] Article 8 ―In Heaven, the fellowship of friends is not essential to man’s happiness, for God is all-sufficing. Yet doubtless friends will be loved and their fellowship will be enjoyed in God.
ONLY BY UNITING OUR WILL TO GOD’S WILL CAN WE FIND TRUE HAPPINESS
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.4.] Article 4 ― Happiness cannot be perfectly attained without rightness or rectitude in the will, for this sets the will in proper alignment with the supreme good, and makes the will love what it loves in perfect subordination to God. In such subordination consists the perfection of the human will, and without this perfection man cannot be perfectly happy. HAPPINESS IS A UNION OF WILLS.
HAPPINESS IS POSSIBLE, YET THAT HAPPINESS IS LINKED TO THE CROSS
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 1 ― Man is manifestly made for happiness or fulfillment. His mind or intellect grasps the notion of universal good; his will tends to it. And the all-good God who made man has not given him deceiving gifts of mind and will. Happiness must be attainable.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 3 ― In the present earthly life man may attain a degree of happiness, but cannot have perfect happiness. On Earth limitations and drawbacks are associated with happiness. Only God possessed in beatific vision can make man perfectly happy, and this vision cannot be had in earthly life.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 5 ― Man’s natural powers can bring him happiness, but not perfect happiness. Man’s true end is supernatural, and is to be attained only by the aid of grace in this life.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 7 ― From a man ... on Earth, good works are required for the attaining of Heaven. ... To attain Heaven, the will must choose and exercise works of virtue. Each meritorious work represents a step towards the supreme good.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 8 ― All men have a natural and inescapable desire for happiness ... all men necessarily crave happiness, complete and unending. Although all men do not have the right notion of what true happiness is, and of how it is to be attained, all men, without exception, crave it.
SO A PERFECTLY HAPPY MARRIAGE & A HAPPY FAMILY IS NOT AN END IN ITSELF, at best it will be an imperfect happiness and only a means to attaining a greater happiness, the ultimate happiness which is the possession of God in Heaven.
We often hear the expression “happily married” and happy family.” It conjures up in our minds an ideal, imaginary, utopian state, whereby there are no problems of note, where everybody loves one another, agrees with one another, obeys one another, as they live their days in an atmosphere of health, peace, joy and laughter, surrounded by an abundance of material goods, so that nothing is lacking for both and soul.
Upon examining a dictionary, you will find “happy” defined as cheerful, content, glad, delighted, pleased, fortuitous, fortunate, lucky, opportune. “Happiness” will be defined as good fortune; a state of well-being and contentment; a pleasurable satisfaction; felicity.
EVERYONE WANTS TO BE PERFECTLY HAPPY
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.1.] Article 7 ― St. Thomas says that All men have the ... same ultimate goal. This ... is complete and enduring satisfaction or fulfillment; such fulfillment is called happiness. But all men do not agree about the precise things in which their ... happiness is to be found. Some think to attain happiness by becoming rich, some by enjoying pleasures, some by exercising power, some by being praised and honored, and so on.
All men act in pursuance of their happiness, or in an endeavor to remove unhappiness. We seek those things which we rightly, but more often wrongly, think will lead to our happiness. We seek our comfort and wealth; we seek to be loved and liked, to be honored and well-known, we seek independence and power, we seek beauty, fitness and strength, we seek the best food and drink we can afford, we seek fun and laughter, we seek joy and peace.....yet once we possess these things, we are never satisfied, the happiness of possessing these things is never perfect, complete, lasting, safe and enduring.
The money may be stolen or lost. Our reputation can easily be rightly, or wrongly, smeared and destroyed. Our friends and loved ones can be fickle, and one day we are loved and liked, the next day we are not. Independence and power cannot be guaranteed by the greatest powers on Earth, let alone one tiny human being or a family. How many once beautiful, healthy, fit and strong persons are now old, sick, and weak, their beauty now fattened, grayed and crinkled. The more we have, the more we still want, yet the more we become riddled with fear and anxiety at losing these things.
WHERE PERFECT HAPPINESS IS NOT FOUND
► NOT IN BEING MILLIONAIRES [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 1 ― St. Thomas Aquinas says that “Man’s happiness is not to be found in wealth, natural wealth which serves his normal needs (such as food, clothing, housing), or artificial wealth which can provide the items of natural wealth, that is, money. Wealth of any kind is a means for acquiring something else; it is a thing that serves; it does not fulfill.”
How many mistakenly make wealth their god and idol, mistakenly thinking that it will bring them perfect happiness. Of course, poverty can drive persons into sin and despair; therefore a certain wealth is necessary to be able to pursue one’s real happiness. But we often make a serious mistake in thinking what we want is what we need; whereas in reality, what we need is often much less than what we want.
In addition how many people misuse their wealth. Instead of it leading them to their true happiness, it merely leads them into sin. Such sins as miserliness, greed, deceit, cheating, fraud, wastefulness, gluttony, worldliness, etc. Their material wealth only creates supernatural debts, which will have to be paid in Purgatory or Hell. Thus what they thought would bring happiness, will only bring misery and pain.
How few are the wealthy who use their wealth in a godly manner; in performing directly or indirectly the spiritual and corporal works of mercy. In supporting the work of the Church, the propagation of the Faith, the work of the Missions, etc.
If we have any wealth, it comes from God’s Providence, no matter how hard our work has been, or how great our intelligence―for any success depends upon the cooperation of God’s Providence. He could have wrecked our acquisition of wealth through financial disaster, ill-health, closing rather than opening doors for us, or in any one of a thousand other ways. Wealth should be used to lead us to an even greater happiness, it is not a perfect happiness in itself.
In fact, there is something far more precious and valuable than any wealth man could lay his hands on; something that money cannot buy. That something is the grace of God. How many wealthy people would weep more over losing their wealth than they would weep over losing the grace of God. We cannot buy our way to Heaven or bribe St. Peter at the Pearly Gates. Yet the love and grace of God will open those gates for us.
So true is this, that three of the four Evangelists reported the following conversation of Our Lord’s in their Gospels:
“And a certain ruler asked Him, saying: ‘Good Master, what shall I do to possess everlasting life?’ And Jesus said to him: ‘Why dost thou call Me good? None is good but God alone! Thou knowest the commandments―Thou shalt not kill―Thou shalt not commit adultery―Thou shalt not steal―Thou shalt not bear false witness―Honor thy father and mother!’ Who said: ‘All these things have I kept from my youth!’ Which, when Jesus had heard, He said to him: ‘Yet one thing is wanting to thee! Sell all whatever thou hast and give to the poor: and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven. And come, follow Me!’ He, having heard these things, became sorrowful―for he was very rich. And Jesus seeing him become sorrowful, said: ‘How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the Kingdom of God―for it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God!’” (Luke 18:18-25; Matthew 19:16-24; Mark 10:17-25).
► NOT IN RECEIVING HONOR [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 2 ― St. Thomas Aquinas also says “Nor can man’s full happiness consist in honors bestowed because of some excellence in him. Any excellence in a man is in him because of some good already possessed; it means that he already has some degree of happiness. Honors come to him because of this happiness, and therefore honors cannot themselves be the constituting elements of perfect happiness.”
Those who are honored still find themselves pursuing a perfect lasting happiness. St. Thomas states that “It is impossible for happiness to consist in honor ... honor can result from happiness, but happiness cannot principally consist therein [in honor]” (idem.). The imperfect happiness of honor does not give perfect happiness. Their soul, though honored, still hungers for something more. They also know that honor, like a flower, can soon wane and be forgotten.
“Those who occupy positions of dignity have excellence of office ... they deserve respect and honor.” A searching for honor Our real concern should be the honor we have before the face of God and His angels. They see our true worth, our real value.
► NOT IN BEING POP STARS, FILM STARS, ETC. [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 3 ― Nor can man’s happiness be found in fame and glory. These, like honors bestowed, presuppose some degree of happiness already attained, and this they publicize and praise. Fame and glory are consequent upon an imperfect happiness, and are, in some sense, the product of it. They cannot, therefore, be the essential elements of perfect happiness.
► NOT IN BEING PRESIDENTS, BOSSES, LEADERS [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 4 ― Man’s perfect happiness cannot consist in the possession of power, for power is not a complete end, but a means; power is valuable according to the use to which it may be put. In a word, power looks on to something further; it cannot itself be the ultimate goal.
► NOT IN BEING SPORTSMEN, ATHLETES [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 5 ― Man’s ultimate happiness does not consist in goods of the body―life, health, strength, beauty, agility, etc. for these goods preserve the body. Merely to preserve life cannot be the end of life. Goods of the body are to be used by reason (intellect and will) somewhat as a ship is used by its master; the master does not use the ship merely to preserve the ship, but to carry profitable cargoes to desired ports. Thus it appears that the goods of the body are means, not complete ends. Besides, man is a rational being as well as a bodily being; he can never be completely fulfilled and satisfied by bodily goods.
► NOT IN BEING GENIUSES, CLEVER MEN [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 6 ― Pleasures, whether bodily or intellectual, cannot bring a man ultimate happiness. We have just seen that bodily things cannot be man’s perfect fulfillment. And mental enjoyments presuppose the end already attained; enjoyment follows upon possession of some good or end; what is consequent upon the end cannot itself be the end.
► NOT IN ANY QUALITIES OF THE SOUL [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 7 ― The goods of the soul―its essence, faculties, acts, habits, perfections―cannot constitute man’s ultimate end. Happiness is for the soul, and to be attained by the soul. The objective ultimate happiness is something outside the soul, which the soul seeks to bring into itself and possess subjectively. Hence this ultimate end is not the soul itself, nor the goods belonging to the soul.
► NOT IN ANY CREATED, MATERIAL GOODS [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.2.] Article 8 ― Indeed, no created good can give man perfect happiness. Only the essential, universal, and boundless good can bring man complete and unfading fulfillment. No created good is universal, essential, and boundless; only the uncreated good can be the ultimate end of man. And this uncreated good is God.
► PERFECT, LASTING HAPPINESS CAN ONLY BE FOUND IN GOD ALONE [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.1.] Article 8 ― All men seek ... happiness. Now, the objective last end of man is the object which, when possessed, will give him happiness. The objective last end of man ... is the infinite good. The infinite good is God.
HOW WE SHOULD VALUE SUPERNATURAL & NATURAL THINGS
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia Q.82.] Article 3 ― For when a good is greater or nobler than the soul itself, it is better to will it (that is, love it) than merely to know it; thus it is a better thing to love God than simply to know God. But when a good is less noble than the soul, intellect, with respect to this good, is superior to the will; thus to know material things is better than to love them.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.4.] art. 7. External goods, such as food, drink, and property, which are required in due measure for earthly happiness, will not be required at all in Heaven. When souls and bodies are reunited at the general resurrection, human bodies will be spiritualized and will no longer have material or animal needs.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.4.] Article 8 ―In Heaven, the fellowship of friends is not essential to man’s happiness, for God is all-sufficing. Yet doubtless friends will be loved and their fellowship will be enjoyed in God.
ONLY BY UNITING OUR WILL TO GOD’S WILL CAN WE FIND TRUE HAPPINESS
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.4.] Article 4 ― Happiness cannot be perfectly attained without rightness or rectitude in the will, for this sets the will in proper alignment with the supreme good, and makes the will love what it loves in perfect subordination to God. In such subordination consists the perfection of the human will, and without this perfection man cannot be perfectly happy. HAPPINESS IS A UNION OF WILLS.
HAPPINESS IS POSSIBLE, YET THAT HAPPINESS IS LINKED TO THE CROSS
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 1 ― Man is manifestly made for happiness or fulfillment. His mind or intellect grasps the notion of universal good; his will tends to it. And the all-good God who made man has not given him deceiving gifts of mind and will. Happiness must be attainable.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 3 ― In the present earthly life man may attain a degree of happiness, but cannot have perfect happiness. On Earth limitations and drawbacks are associated with happiness. Only God possessed in beatific vision can make man perfectly happy, and this vision cannot be had in earthly life.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 5 ― Man’s natural powers can bring him happiness, but not perfect happiness. Man’s true end is supernatural, and is to be attained only by the aid of grace in this life.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 7 ― From a man ... on Earth, good works are required for the attaining of Heaven. ... To attain Heaven, the will must choose and exercise works of virtue. Each meritorious work represents a step towards the supreme good.
► [St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q.5.] Article 8 ― All men have a natural and inescapable desire for happiness ... all men necessarily crave happiness, complete and unending. Although all men do not have the right notion of what true happiness is, and of how it is to be attained, all men, without exception, crave it.
SO A PERFECTLY HAPPY MARRIAGE & A HAPPY FAMILY IS NOT AN END IN ITSELF, at best it will be an imperfect happiness and only a means to attaining a greater happiness, the ultimate happiness which is the possession of God in Heaven.
Article 16
The Destroyers of Happiness
The Destroyers of Happiness
MARRIAGE IS IN A BAD WAY
It would not be far from the truth to state that the institution of marriage is undergoing a crisis. At no other time in our nation’s history has the problem been as serious. Why Do We Say, Marriage is in a Bad Way?
1. Easy Breakup
Statisticians say 50% of all marriages in the U.S.A. end up in separation or divorce. It is an ever worsening situation. Some experts predict that 85% of the marriages that take place this calendar year will eventually break up. Whatever figures we accept, it is undeniable that there is an appalling amount of marital discord amongst our families, our friends and our co‑workers. The trend seems to be toward more and more unsuccessful marriages.
► The basic reason for this phenomena: Lack of Faith on the part of one or both spouses. In other words, lack of belief in God’s teachings and in God’s laws. The glue that keeps marriages intact is belief in God. God is the author of marriage. He made the rules governing this sacred institution. Chief among these rules is the stipulation that marriage is indissoluble, that is, unbreakable. It lasts “until death do us part.
► Secular humanism, selfishness, loss of Faith and lessening of prayer life. In movies, on television, and in the secular media there is a harmful message, often repeated: “Divorce is commonplace―there is nothing morally wrong with it. Do what you want. Seek your own happiness outside God’s Law.”
► Through the liberal media, most Americans have become conditioned and weakened in their understanding that marriage is a Divine Institution. When disagreements inevitably rise early in their marriages, many couples quickly resort to threats of “walking out”. In former days, they would earn Heaven by accepting their crosses on Earth.
2. Virtual Divorce
This, too, is a serious problem: the couple that does not actually break‑up, but is very unhappy together. They are merely, “sticking it out” because of the children, or because “my parents would be upset”.
While this problem is not as bad as an actual break‑up, it is a sign that the marriage is in trouble.
1. There is scarcely anything worse for a child than the divorce of his parents. Every divorce is an act of selfishness. One’s own happiness is selfishly preferred to the child’s welfare.
2. All psychiatrists agree that the child needs primary caretakers, i.e., parents who take care of them on a daily basis.
WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR THIS SAD STATE?
(a) Lack of Enthusiasm
They envy single people for their freedom and lack of responsibility. People who lack enthusiasm for their own marriages do not live for their marriage. Jobs, careers, and recreation are more exciting. The lack of enthusiasm towards marriage is symptomatic of the unhappiness and lack of fulfillment that many experience.
(b) Separate Interests
Reside under the same roof, but separate interests keep them apart for long periods of time. In our “keep‑up‑with‑the‑Jones’s” society there is this all‑too common phenomenon: a husband works a full time job, while at the same time, his wife holds outside employment full time. Sometimes their work hours are so constricted that they hardly see each other.
In addition to his job that takes him away from his home, the husband may participate in some recreational activity. Or, while the husband may leave the house only infrequently, he may have an inordinate attachment to television, internet, smartphone, social media, etc. The same attachments can also possess the wife. As a result, there is little time to do things together or to communicate in depth.
Years ago, husbands and wives worked together on the farm, ate meals together, and, even when out of each other’s sight, were never far away. In our present society, because of separate interests, sufficient time is not spent together. Love increases as knowledge increases. Love in marriage is a quality that does not remain static (i.e., motionless). If it does not grow, it diminishes. Love is a function of the “will”, and the “will” can only respond to those things presented by the intellect.
The more a man and woman get to know each other, the greater is their potential to grow in love. It is similar to love of God, our Creator. The more we know about God, the more we understand His attributes ... such as His goodness, mercy, power, wisdom, justice ... the greater our potential to love Him.
(c) Lack of Sympathy and Understanding
► Once upon a time
Each originally found in the other ideal. Faults were not dwelled on. Each admired the qualities they discovered
► Time Marches On
If we could fast‑forward time to perhaps five years later, we may find that this young man and young woman now have many complaints about each other.
● “He” leaves the kitchen sink in a mess ... and the bathroom, too!
● “She” cries or becomes moody when she can’t win an argument!
● “She” talks on the phone all day long to her mother and her girlfriends. What the heck do they talk about?
● Without make‑up she scares me!
● He is so fussy about what he eats. The other day I accidentally broke the yolk on a fried egg and he wouldn’t eat it!
● In the morning she’s grouchy!
● When “he” gets home from work he hardly talks to me! And here I am all day with the children―yearning for his adult company! He is tired (or so he says). All he wants is a can of beer and his television!
Sounds like a classic situation! After living together for a few years, there tends to be a lack of sympathy and understanding for the other spouse. One husband remarked to a priest: “Father―my wife and I never have an argument ... as long as she doesn’t talk to me.” Or the wife may say: “Father―we never argue … because he’s never around!”
► Household Repairs
Marriage may have seemed like a new house without flaw on the wedding day. But need maintenance and care, they begin to show wear and tear―like cracks in the plaster from a house “settling”.
► So, repair the cracks,
by pouring in attention to needs, forgiveness for disappointments and >let-downs’, be more unselfishness and understanding, not by resorting to arguments, bitterness and inflexibility. Patch up that wall with virtuous acts, and humor, and prayer ... and with renewed effort to please God and your beloved spouse.
(d) Weakening of Home Life
1. Home has become a “service station” or “gas station” ― Your stop-off on your way home from work or school. Fill-up with the “gasoline” of food, and then zoom off out the door again.
2. A collection of appliances does not make a happy home.
3. Artificial Entertainment ― TV, Internet, Smartphone, Tablet, Laptop, Music, Videos, etc
(e) Prevalence of Adultery
Mental Adultery and Physical Adultery: Learn how to avoid it.
(f) Materialism of Modern Marriages
Nowadays, people want more material things in their lives than they want God in their lives. The time, money and effort spent on acquiring material things FAR EXCEEDS the time spent talking about God or religious things, FAR EXCEEDS the effort put into living a spiritual life, FAR EXCEEDS the money spent on things that can help the spiritual life (such as religious books, magazines, recordings of sermons and conferences, religious videos or DVDs, etc.).
Conclusion
The chief cause of marital break-up, or unhappiness in marriage is selfishness (which is really a disguised form of childishness). Sometimes marriage problems are not truly marriage problems. The fault often lies with the individual who puts himself first ... before God, before his wife and before his children. This selfishness is most evident in the husband who wants to achieve his own satisfaction and his own happiness first, or in the woman who puts her own happiness, her own “fulfillment” before that of her husband and her children.
Only God can correctly teach us and demand sublimation of ourselves and of our individual lives in the interests of that deeper and wider life that we have in common in marriage.
Only God can instruct us, and only Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother and St. Joseph can give us the example of how we should work this out in our daily lives.
Selfishness can be converted to unselfishness if we focus our attention upon God our Creator and upon the Holy Family, and firmly resolve to keep God’s laws and follow the example of the Holy Family. If married couples work towards this beautiful unselfishness in which they think not first of themselves, but rather of God, their spouse and their children, they will not only be sanctified, but will find the greatest degree of happiness that may be allotted to man in this “valley of tears”.
It is the great irony that unselfishness leads to a greater degree of happiness than selfishness. The secular world views this differently. The more we pursue our own gratification, says the world, the happier we will be. Just the reverse is true. The more we seek our own gratification at the expense of others, the unhappier we become, and, paradoxically, the less complete and fulfilled as a human being. Good moral principles always win out in the end. Selfish human whims lead to a psychological wrecking ground. Some people hop from one garden to another trying to find the elusive bird of happiness while, as always, it can be found in one’s own backyard, in the presence of God and in following the virtuous behavior of each member of the Holy Family.
It would not be far from the truth to state that the institution of marriage is undergoing a crisis. At no other time in our nation’s history has the problem been as serious. Why Do We Say, Marriage is in a Bad Way?
1. Easy Breakup
Statisticians say 50% of all marriages in the U.S.A. end up in separation or divorce. It is an ever worsening situation. Some experts predict that 85% of the marriages that take place this calendar year will eventually break up. Whatever figures we accept, it is undeniable that there is an appalling amount of marital discord amongst our families, our friends and our co‑workers. The trend seems to be toward more and more unsuccessful marriages.
► The basic reason for this phenomena: Lack of Faith on the part of one or both spouses. In other words, lack of belief in God’s teachings and in God’s laws. The glue that keeps marriages intact is belief in God. God is the author of marriage. He made the rules governing this sacred institution. Chief among these rules is the stipulation that marriage is indissoluble, that is, unbreakable. It lasts “until death do us part.
► Secular humanism, selfishness, loss of Faith and lessening of prayer life. In movies, on television, and in the secular media there is a harmful message, often repeated: “Divorce is commonplace―there is nothing morally wrong with it. Do what you want. Seek your own happiness outside God’s Law.”
► Through the liberal media, most Americans have become conditioned and weakened in their understanding that marriage is a Divine Institution. When disagreements inevitably rise early in their marriages, many couples quickly resort to threats of “walking out”. In former days, they would earn Heaven by accepting their crosses on Earth.
2. Virtual Divorce
This, too, is a serious problem: the couple that does not actually break‑up, but is very unhappy together. They are merely, “sticking it out” because of the children, or because “my parents would be upset”.
While this problem is not as bad as an actual break‑up, it is a sign that the marriage is in trouble.
1. There is scarcely anything worse for a child than the divorce of his parents. Every divorce is an act of selfishness. One’s own happiness is selfishly preferred to the child’s welfare.
2. All psychiatrists agree that the child needs primary caretakers, i.e., parents who take care of them on a daily basis.
WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR THIS SAD STATE?
(a) Lack of Enthusiasm
They envy single people for their freedom and lack of responsibility. People who lack enthusiasm for their own marriages do not live for their marriage. Jobs, careers, and recreation are more exciting. The lack of enthusiasm towards marriage is symptomatic of the unhappiness and lack of fulfillment that many experience.
(b) Separate Interests
Reside under the same roof, but separate interests keep them apart for long periods of time. In our “keep‑up‑with‑the‑Jones’s” society there is this all‑too common phenomenon: a husband works a full time job, while at the same time, his wife holds outside employment full time. Sometimes their work hours are so constricted that they hardly see each other.
In addition to his job that takes him away from his home, the husband may participate in some recreational activity. Or, while the husband may leave the house only infrequently, he may have an inordinate attachment to television, internet, smartphone, social media, etc. The same attachments can also possess the wife. As a result, there is little time to do things together or to communicate in depth.
Years ago, husbands and wives worked together on the farm, ate meals together, and, even when out of each other’s sight, were never far away. In our present society, because of separate interests, sufficient time is not spent together. Love increases as knowledge increases. Love in marriage is a quality that does not remain static (i.e., motionless). If it does not grow, it diminishes. Love is a function of the “will”, and the “will” can only respond to those things presented by the intellect.
The more a man and woman get to know each other, the greater is their potential to grow in love. It is similar to love of God, our Creator. The more we know about God, the more we understand His attributes ... such as His goodness, mercy, power, wisdom, justice ... the greater our potential to love Him.
(c) Lack of Sympathy and Understanding
► Once upon a time
Each originally found in the other ideal. Faults were not dwelled on. Each admired the qualities they discovered
► Time Marches On
If we could fast‑forward time to perhaps five years later, we may find that this young man and young woman now have many complaints about each other.
● “He” leaves the kitchen sink in a mess ... and the bathroom, too!
● “She” cries or becomes moody when she can’t win an argument!
● “She” talks on the phone all day long to her mother and her girlfriends. What the heck do they talk about?
● Without make‑up she scares me!
● He is so fussy about what he eats. The other day I accidentally broke the yolk on a fried egg and he wouldn’t eat it!
● In the morning she’s grouchy!
● When “he” gets home from work he hardly talks to me! And here I am all day with the children―yearning for his adult company! He is tired (or so he says). All he wants is a can of beer and his television!
Sounds like a classic situation! After living together for a few years, there tends to be a lack of sympathy and understanding for the other spouse. One husband remarked to a priest: “Father―my wife and I never have an argument ... as long as she doesn’t talk to me.” Or the wife may say: “Father―we never argue … because he’s never around!”
► Household Repairs
Marriage may have seemed like a new house without flaw on the wedding day. But need maintenance and care, they begin to show wear and tear―like cracks in the plaster from a house “settling”.
► So, repair the cracks,
by pouring in attention to needs, forgiveness for disappointments and >let-downs’, be more unselfishness and understanding, not by resorting to arguments, bitterness and inflexibility. Patch up that wall with virtuous acts, and humor, and prayer ... and with renewed effort to please God and your beloved spouse.
(d) Weakening of Home Life
1. Home has become a “service station” or “gas station” ― Your stop-off on your way home from work or school. Fill-up with the “gasoline” of food, and then zoom off out the door again.
2. A collection of appliances does not make a happy home.
3. Artificial Entertainment ― TV, Internet, Smartphone, Tablet, Laptop, Music, Videos, etc
(e) Prevalence of Adultery
Mental Adultery and Physical Adultery: Learn how to avoid it.
(f) Materialism of Modern Marriages
Nowadays, people want more material things in their lives than they want God in their lives. The time, money and effort spent on acquiring material things FAR EXCEEDS the time spent talking about God or religious things, FAR EXCEEDS the effort put into living a spiritual life, FAR EXCEEDS the money spent on things that can help the spiritual life (such as religious books, magazines, recordings of sermons and conferences, religious videos or DVDs, etc.).
Conclusion
The chief cause of marital break-up, or unhappiness in marriage is selfishness (which is really a disguised form of childishness). Sometimes marriage problems are not truly marriage problems. The fault often lies with the individual who puts himself first ... before God, before his wife and before his children. This selfishness is most evident in the husband who wants to achieve his own satisfaction and his own happiness first, or in the woman who puts her own happiness, her own “fulfillment” before that of her husband and her children.
Only God can correctly teach us and demand sublimation of ourselves and of our individual lives in the interests of that deeper and wider life that we have in common in marriage.
Only God can instruct us, and only Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother and St. Joseph can give us the example of how we should work this out in our daily lives.
Selfishness can be converted to unselfishness if we focus our attention upon God our Creator and upon the Holy Family, and firmly resolve to keep God’s laws and follow the example of the Holy Family. If married couples work towards this beautiful unselfishness in which they think not first of themselves, but rather of God, their spouse and their children, they will not only be sanctified, but will find the greatest degree of happiness that may be allotted to man in this “valley of tears”.
It is the great irony that unselfishness leads to a greater degree of happiness than selfishness. The secular world views this differently. The more we pursue our own gratification, says the world, the happier we will be. Just the reverse is true. The more we seek our own gratification at the expense of others, the unhappier we become, and, paradoxically, the less complete and fulfilled as a human being. Good moral principles always win out in the end. Selfish human whims lead to a psychological wrecking ground. Some people hop from one garden to another trying to find the elusive bird of happiness while, as always, it can be found in one’s own backyard, in the presence of God and in following the virtuous behavior of each member of the Holy Family.
Article 17
The Builders of Happiness
The Builders of Happiness
PERFECT HAPPINESS WILL ONLY BE FOUND IN GOD
(a) We cannot find lasting and perfect happiness in money, honor, fame, glory, health, beauty, strength, intelligence, etc.
(b) Neither can we find lasting and perfect happiness in our spouse or our family.
(c) Our Lady said to St. Bernadette at Lourdes: “I do not promise to make you happy in this world, but in the next!”
(d) The more God-centered or Heaven-centered a family is, the happier it will be.
MARRIAGE IS A SACRAMENT THAT WILL LEAD US TO GOD
Ž► Made in Heaven...Made by God...Reflects God’s Relationships
(a) The love between husband and wife can be compared to the love between God the Father and God the Son; or it can be compared to the love between Christ and His Church; or the love of God for mankind.
(b) This love is manifest by an overwhelming spirit of Sacrifice. Greater love no man hath than he who lay down his life for his friends ... God so loved the world that He sent His only-begotten Son ... Obedient unto death, even death on the Cross ... God created out of love, in order to share His love with His created creatures ... Parents create children to share their love with them ...
► God, Who is Love, Lays down Rules of Love
(a) Rules by God ... Procreation ... Fidelity ... Indissolubility
(b) Create children out of love ... They remain together out of love ... They are faithful out of love.
► Scriptural reference to Marriage and its Purpose:
(a) Man & Woman: “Not good for man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18) … So God created woman.
(b) Children: “Increase and multiply! Go upon the Earth and fill it” (Genesis 9:7)―children are the purpose of marriage.
(c) Indissolubility: “The two shall cleave to each other and shall be one flesh” (Matthew 19:5). “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder” (Matthew 19:6).
(d) Fidelity: Whosoever looks upon another woman lusting after her, commits adultery in his heart.
► Adam & Eve Happily Married When Obedient and in God’s Grace
(a) Were happily married as long as they obeyed the rules and kept God’s Grace.
(b) After they sinned and lost God’s Grace, disorder and unhappiness entered their lives.
(c) Through this sin, we are left with wounds that cause disorder in this true hierarchy.
(d) The wounds and scars of Original Sin are: (1) Intellect darkened. (2) Will weakened. (3) Rebellion from below.
► Sin Corrupts Our Nature
(a) There is no greater evil than sin, no greater destroyer.
(b) Pride and Selfishness is the root of all sin.
(c) Pride and Selfishness is at the heart of marital problems.
► Grace Perfects Nature ― the Solution to Sin
(a) Marriage runs on grace. “Without me you can do nothing” (John 15:5).
(b) Marriages fail because they run on something other than God. They become natural instead of supernatural.
(c) The Sacrament of Marriage gives a title to all the graces that are needed for a successful marriage.
(d) We need to acquire those graces on a regular daily basis.
(e) Other Sacraments also give us graces that will help our marriage. Confession & Communion.
(f) Helps us reflect God. Parents should be Godlike. “Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48).
(g) They govern on His behalf. They must have His spirit. They must respect and enforce His laws.
► Sources of Grace
(a) Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation. Especially Marriage―sacramental grace to spouses.
(b) Also frequent reception of the Sacraments of Confession and Holy Communion.
(c) Prayer to ask God, to make friends with God.
(d) Sacramentals.
(e) Sacrifices and Good works.
► Lack Grace Blinds Our Intellect and Causes Havoc
(a) Make sure you know the person you are marrying. Take your time. Do not marry in haste.
(b) Be realistic. There is no “Mr. Perfect” or “Miss Perfect”. Know the faults of the person you will marry.
(c) Do not marry a non-Catholic. You will weaken your Faith and your marriage.
(d) Do not marry for money, beauty, social advantage, etc. Marry for beauty, virtue and strength of soul.
(e) Once you marry, seek to know the person you married throughout the changes they will undergo.
► Lack of Grace Weakens Our Will and Causes Havoc
(a) We cannot love what we do not know.
(b) The more you know the more that knowledge leads to love or hatred.
(c) We must however be humble. We must remember that we too have faults.
(d) Today, in this proud world, we are too judgmental.
► Hierarchy of Love
(a) You spouse comes first, then your children, then your own parents, then your family members (brothers and sisters), then your relatives, then your friends, then your benefactors, then other persons, then material things.
► Loving Service presupposes a Likeable Master.
(a) it is easy to serve someone we love ― It is hard to serve someone we hate.
(b) That is why we must work at being loved, rather than giving cause for hatred.
► Correct Use of Authority
(a) Be Godlike ― love wife as Christ loves the Church.
(b) A spirit of sacrifice should remain and be evident.
► God Must Be Taken Into Account
(a) Prayer ... we talk to the one’s we love; the more we love, the more we are with them, so it has to be with God.
(b) Time spent with God, visiting God...He should not be treated like a relative we are forced to visit.
(c) Taking God’s Advice...Reading God’s word; seeking the advice of the Church; seeking help in prayer.
► Marriage Is Indissoluble
(a) Forever ... Till death us do part.
(b) In all conditions ... Richer/poorer ... Better/Worse ... Sickness/Health.
► Primary Purpose Of Marriage
(a) Three Parents in every Family
(b) God provides the soul. Husband and wife supply the body.
(c) The soul is more important than the body.
(d) Should concentrate more on the qualities of soul than body.
(e) If we adore the body, how will our children do otherwise.
(f) If we treasure money more than grace ― how will our children do otherwise?
► Marriage Brings To An End The Era Of The Selfish Individual
(a) Focus on wife & children ... not just self.
(b) Number of children left to providence ― nothing is meant to harm our souls. Selfish modern man sees children as an obstacle to personal pleasure. Less money and time to spend on oneself.
(c) Continence is a way to space out children ― contraception is forbidden. Virtue of temperance to restrain the passions and appetites, which are blind in themselves and know no limits.
(d) Many parents only say that they cannot afford any more children, but what they mean is “If I have any more children, I will not be able to continue living according to the expectancies and over-extravagance of this worldly and godless society.” How much of what we have do we really need? How many of us want more than we need?
► The Raising Of Children ― Not Just Giving Birth To Them
(a) The responsibility of marriage requires that we care for our young.
(b) More than just material care ― MORAL UPBRINGING.
(c) That means spending much time with our children, not just 15 minutes a day.
(d) MUST WATCH WHAT THE CHILD ABSORBS & WHO THE CHILD MIXES WITH―TV ... Internet … Smartphone … Social Media … Radio ... Magazines ... Friends ... etc.
(e) That means taking time out to discipline our children in an appropriate manner.
(f) Children are raised from the very first day of their existence.
(a) We cannot find lasting and perfect happiness in money, honor, fame, glory, health, beauty, strength, intelligence, etc.
(b) Neither can we find lasting and perfect happiness in our spouse or our family.
(c) Our Lady said to St. Bernadette at Lourdes: “I do not promise to make you happy in this world, but in the next!”
(d) The more God-centered or Heaven-centered a family is, the happier it will be.
MARRIAGE IS A SACRAMENT THAT WILL LEAD US TO GOD
Ž► Made in Heaven...Made by God...Reflects God’s Relationships
(a) The love between husband and wife can be compared to the love between God the Father and God the Son; or it can be compared to the love between Christ and His Church; or the love of God for mankind.
(b) This love is manifest by an overwhelming spirit of Sacrifice. Greater love no man hath than he who lay down his life for his friends ... God so loved the world that He sent His only-begotten Son ... Obedient unto death, even death on the Cross ... God created out of love, in order to share His love with His created creatures ... Parents create children to share their love with them ...
► God, Who is Love, Lays down Rules of Love
(a) Rules by God ... Procreation ... Fidelity ... Indissolubility
(b) Create children out of love ... They remain together out of love ... They are faithful out of love.
► Scriptural reference to Marriage and its Purpose:
(a) Man & Woman: “Not good for man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18) … So God created woman.
(b) Children: “Increase and multiply! Go upon the Earth and fill it” (Genesis 9:7)―children are the purpose of marriage.
(c) Indissolubility: “The two shall cleave to each other and shall be one flesh” (Matthew 19:5). “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder” (Matthew 19:6).
(d) Fidelity: Whosoever looks upon another woman lusting after her, commits adultery in his heart.
► Adam & Eve Happily Married When Obedient and in God’s Grace
(a) Were happily married as long as they obeyed the rules and kept God’s Grace.
(b) After they sinned and lost God’s Grace, disorder and unhappiness entered their lives.
(c) Through this sin, we are left with wounds that cause disorder in this true hierarchy.
(d) The wounds and scars of Original Sin are: (1) Intellect darkened. (2) Will weakened. (3) Rebellion from below.
► Sin Corrupts Our Nature
(a) There is no greater evil than sin, no greater destroyer.
(b) Pride and Selfishness is the root of all sin.
(c) Pride and Selfishness is at the heart of marital problems.
► Grace Perfects Nature ― the Solution to Sin
(a) Marriage runs on grace. “Without me you can do nothing” (John 15:5).
(b) Marriages fail because they run on something other than God. They become natural instead of supernatural.
(c) The Sacrament of Marriage gives a title to all the graces that are needed for a successful marriage.
(d) We need to acquire those graces on a regular daily basis.
(e) Other Sacraments also give us graces that will help our marriage. Confession & Communion.
(f) Helps us reflect God. Parents should be Godlike. “Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48).
(g) They govern on His behalf. They must have His spirit. They must respect and enforce His laws.
► Sources of Grace
(a) Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation. Especially Marriage―sacramental grace to spouses.
(b) Also frequent reception of the Sacraments of Confession and Holy Communion.
(c) Prayer to ask God, to make friends with God.
(d) Sacramentals.
(e) Sacrifices and Good works.
► Lack Grace Blinds Our Intellect and Causes Havoc
(a) Make sure you know the person you are marrying. Take your time. Do not marry in haste.
(b) Be realistic. There is no “Mr. Perfect” or “Miss Perfect”. Know the faults of the person you will marry.
(c) Do not marry a non-Catholic. You will weaken your Faith and your marriage.
(d) Do not marry for money, beauty, social advantage, etc. Marry for beauty, virtue and strength of soul.
(e) Once you marry, seek to know the person you married throughout the changes they will undergo.
► Lack of Grace Weakens Our Will and Causes Havoc
(a) We cannot love what we do not know.
(b) The more you know the more that knowledge leads to love or hatred.
(c) We must however be humble. We must remember that we too have faults.
(d) Today, in this proud world, we are too judgmental.
► Hierarchy of Love
(a) You spouse comes first, then your children, then your own parents, then your family members (brothers and sisters), then your relatives, then your friends, then your benefactors, then other persons, then material things.
► Loving Service presupposes a Likeable Master.
(a) it is easy to serve someone we love ― It is hard to serve someone we hate.
(b) That is why we must work at being loved, rather than giving cause for hatred.
► Correct Use of Authority
(a) Be Godlike ― love wife as Christ loves the Church.
(b) A spirit of sacrifice should remain and be evident.
► God Must Be Taken Into Account
(a) Prayer ... we talk to the one’s we love; the more we love, the more we are with them, so it has to be with God.
(b) Time spent with God, visiting God...He should not be treated like a relative we are forced to visit.
(c) Taking God’s Advice...Reading God’s word; seeking the advice of the Church; seeking help in prayer.
► Marriage Is Indissoluble
(a) Forever ... Till death us do part.
(b) In all conditions ... Richer/poorer ... Better/Worse ... Sickness/Health.
► Primary Purpose Of Marriage
(a) Three Parents in every Family
(b) God provides the soul. Husband and wife supply the body.
(c) The soul is more important than the body.
(d) Should concentrate more on the qualities of soul than body.
(e) If we adore the body, how will our children do otherwise.
(f) If we treasure money more than grace ― how will our children do otherwise?
► Marriage Brings To An End The Era Of The Selfish Individual
(a) Focus on wife & children ... not just self.
(b) Number of children left to providence ― nothing is meant to harm our souls. Selfish modern man sees children as an obstacle to personal pleasure. Less money and time to spend on oneself.
(c) Continence is a way to space out children ― contraception is forbidden. Virtue of temperance to restrain the passions and appetites, which are blind in themselves and know no limits.
(d) Many parents only say that they cannot afford any more children, but what they mean is “If I have any more children, I will not be able to continue living according to the expectancies and over-extravagance of this worldly and godless society.” How much of what we have do we really need? How many of us want more than we need?
► The Raising Of Children ― Not Just Giving Birth To Them
(a) The responsibility of marriage requires that we care for our young.
(b) More than just material care ― MORAL UPBRINGING.
(c) That means spending much time with our children, not just 15 minutes a day.
(d) MUST WATCH WHAT THE CHILD ABSORBS & WHO THE CHILD MIXES WITH―TV ... Internet … Smartphone … Social Media … Radio ... Magazines ... Friends ... etc.
(e) That means taking time out to discipline our children in an appropriate manner.
(f) Children are raised from the very first day of their existence.
Article 18
The Qualities of Manhood
The Qualities of Manhood
The Qualities of Manhood?
― A man of God.
― A man who puts the common good above the individual good, i.e. an unselfish man
― A man with strength of mind
― A man with strength of will
― A man of virtue
― All of which will make him a leader by word and example
A MAN OF GOD
―By renouncing our way of seeing things and by adhering to God’s way of seeing them―this is Faith.
―By renouncing the pursuit of earthly goods in order to elevate ourselves to what God desires for us; namely, heaven, our sanctification and by having confidence in the strength of God’s grace―this is Hope.
―By deciding to love God above self and all else; by bringing our will into conformity with God’s; by loving our neighbor as Jesus loves him; in giving our lives for our brethren―this is Charity.
1. A MAN OF FAITH
―By renouncing our way of seeing things and by adhering to God’s way of seeing them―this is Faith.
―Seeing things God’s way. Not looking with natural eyes, but with the eyes of Faith.
―St. Paul to Romans 1:17 ― “The just man liveth by faith”
―Luke 18:8 “the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?”
―When the Apostles were looking for deacons to help them in their work, “...they chose Stephen, a man full of faith.” (Acts 6:5).
―We must be men of faith. Scripture praises faith on numerous occasions and criticizes a lack of faith:
―“O thou of little faith, why didst thou doubt?” ... “Great is thy faith, be it done to thee as thou wilt” ... “If you have faith as a grain of mustard-seed, nothing shall be impossible to you” “Have the faith of God” (Mt.14:31; 15:28; 17:19); “Why are you fearful, have you no faith yet?” “Thy faith hath made thee whole” (Mk. 4:40; 10:52; 11:22).
―Jesus heals the soldier’s servant because of his faith (Lk.7:6-9) : “Amen I say to you, I have not found so great faith, not even in Israel.”
―How many men have faith in themselves, but little faith in God?
―“We cannot give what we haven’t got. How can we expect our family to be faithful if we are not?
2. A MAN OF HOPE
―By renouncing the pursuit of earthly goods in order to elevate ourselves to what God desires for us; namely, heaven, our sanctification and by having confidence in the strength of God’s grace―this is Hope.
―In St. Luke account of the Sermon on the Mount (Ch. 12), Jesus speaks renouncing this pursuit of earthly goods:
“Be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat, nor for your body, what you shall put on. The life is more than the meat: and the body is more than the raiment. Consider the ravens, for they sow not, neither do they reap, neither have they storehouse nor barn, and God feedeth them. How much are you more valuable than they? And which of you by taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? If then ye be not able to do so much as the least thing, why are you solicitous for the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow: they labor not, neither do they spin. But I say to you, not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these. Now, if God clothe in this manner the grass that is to‑day in the field and to‑morrow is cast into the oven: how much more you, O ye of little faith? And seek not what you shall eat or what you shall drink: and be not lifted up on high. For all these things do the nations of the world seek. But your Father knoweth that you have need of these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice: and all these things shall be added unto you.” (Luke 12).
―How many men first seek their own kingdom and not the kingdom of God?
―How many men rate passing earthly joys above the lasting ones of heaven?
―How many men trust first in themselves, rather than the grace of God?
―How many men could tell their sons how a car engine works, but couldn’t explain how God’s grace works?
3. A MAN OF CHARITY
―By deciding to love God above self and all else; by bringing our will into conformity with God’s; by loving our neighbor as Jesus loves him; in giving our lives for our brethren―this is Charity.
―A Catholic Father’s rule of conduct is not an exterior code of laws, a list of things allowed and forbidden. It is life that manifests an interior love of God, where it is no longer the father that lives, but Christ that lives in him.
―“Love God and do what you want” says St. Augustine. Because if we love someone, we won’t want to do anything that hurts or displeases them.
―“Love” is a word constantly on the lips of our contemporary world, but it has little idea of what it really is. The flabby thing they have in mind is easily associated with priests, probably because so many of the priests are now flabby, spiritually speaking. It is not so readily associated with the soldier, unless you have in mind the real thing. The real thing, the real love, is what allows a warrior to give his life for a comrade even as it was the reason Jesus Christ died to redeem all men. Jesus Christ, the Man-God, loved. “Greater love no man hath than he who lay down his life for his friends”
Lay down his life for God, Church, Country, Family, Wife and Children.
LOVE OF GOD―above all things. If you love Keep My Commandments.
LOVE OF CHURCH―Common good before the individual good. Where are churchmen today, priests & laity.
LOVE OF COUNTRY―true love of country. Obey God rather than men. Laws in accordance with God’s laws.
LOVE OF FAMILY―microcosm of Church & State.
LOVE OF WIFE―Scripture tells men to love their wives like Christ loved the Church
LOVE OF CHILDREN― “And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.” (Matthew 10:42). “But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea!” (Matthew 18:6).
―In its most elemental form, love is simply to want the best for someone else, to wish him well; in other words, it is what made the Church evangelical once upon a time. That is, when it was understood that it is not loving to let a man persist in religious error or utter spiritual absurdities. Now it is thought that the loving thing is not to speak of hell, or at least not to speak of it as if anyone goes there.
―Love is also the font of justice. When fathers were still men enough to inflict punishment on their sons, it is what they were getting at when they said, “This hurts me more than it hurts you.” Also the phrase that all fathers should remember: “My son, reject not the correction of the Lord: and do not faint when thou art chastised by him: For whom the Lord loveth, he chastiseth: and as a father in the son he pleaseth himself.” (Prov. 3:11-12).
―Sometimes love takes the name of mercy. It is under that name that we have known the love of God since the Fall. In any event, love is what binds men together. “The Lord is gracious and merciful: patient and plenteous in mercy. The Lord is sweet to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.” (Ps.144:8-9).
So the husband and father must be above all a man of God who has to lead his family to God, and who must be seen to be living by Faith, Hope and Charity.
―By renouncing our way of seeing things and by adhering to God’s way of seeing them―this is Faith.
―By renouncing the pursuit of earthly goods in order to elevate ourselves to what God desires for us; namely, heaven, our sanctification and by having confidence in the strength of God’s grace―this is Hope.
―By deciding to love God above self and all else; by bringing our will into conformity with God’s; by loving our neighbor as Jesus loves him; in giving our lives for our brethren―this is Charity.
― A man of God.
― A man who puts the common good above the individual good, i.e. an unselfish man
― A man with strength of mind
― A man with strength of will
― A man of virtue
― All of which will make him a leader by word and example
A MAN OF GOD
―By renouncing our way of seeing things and by adhering to God’s way of seeing them―this is Faith.
―By renouncing the pursuit of earthly goods in order to elevate ourselves to what God desires for us; namely, heaven, our sanctification and by having confidence in the strength of God’s grace―this is Hope.
―By deciding to love God above self and all else; by bringing our will into conformity with God’s; by loving our neighbor as Jesus loves him; in giving our lives for our brethren―this is Charity.
1. A MAN OF FAITH
―By renouncing our way of seeing things and by adhering to God’s way of seeing them―this is Faith.
―Seeing things God’s way. Not looking with natural eyes, but with the eyes of Faith.
―St. Paul to Romans 1:17 ― “The just man liveth by faith”
―Luke 18:8 “the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?”
―When the Apostles were looking for deacons to help them in their work, “...they chose Stephen, a man full of faith.” (Acts 6:5).
―We must be men of faith. Scripture praises faith on numerous occasions and criticizes a lack of faith:
―“O thou of little faith, why didst thou doubt?” ... “Great is thy faith, be it done to thee as thou wilt” ... “If you have faith as a grain of mustard-seed, nothing shall be impossible to you” “Have the faith of God” (Mt.14:31; 15:28; 17:19); “Why are you fearful, have you no faith yet?” “Thy faith hath made thee whole” (Mk. 4:40; 10:52; 11:22).
―Jesus heals the soldier’s servant because of his faith (Lk.7:6-9) : “Amen I say to you, I have not found so great faith, not even in Israel.”
―How many men have faith in themselves, but little faith in God?
―“We cannot give what we haven’t got. How can we expect our family to be faithful if we are not?
2. A MAN OF HOPE
―By renouncing the pursuit of earthly goods in order to elevate ourselves to what God desires for us; namely, heaven, our sanctification and by having confidence in the strength of God’s grace―this is Hope.
―In St. Luke account of the Sermon on the Mount (Ch. 12), Jesus speaks renouncing this pursuit of earthly goods:
“Be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat, nor for your body, what you shall put on. The life is more than the meat: and the body is more than the raiment. Consider the ravens, for they sow not, neither do they reap, neither have they storehouse nor barn, and God feedeth them. How much are you more valuable than they? And which of you by taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? If then ye be not able to do so much as the least thing, why are you solicitous for the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow: they labor not, neither do they spin. But I say to you, not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these. Now, if God clothe in this manner the grass that is to‑day in the field and to‑morrow is cast into the oven: how much more you, O ye of little faith? And seek not what you shall eat or what you shall drink: and be not lifted up on high. For all these things do the nations of the world seek. But your Father knoweth that you have need of these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice: and all these things shall be added unto you.” (Luke 12).
―How many men first seek their own kingdom and not the kingdom of God?
―How many men rate passing earthly joys above the lasting ones of heaven?
―How many men trust first in themselves, rather than the grace of God?
―How many men could tell their sons how a car engine works, but couldn’t explain how God’s grace works?
3. A MAN OF CHARITY
―By deciding to love God above self and all else; by bringing our will into conformity with God’s; by loving our neighbor as Jesus loves him; in giving our lives for our brethren―this is Charity.
―A Catholic Father’s rule of conduct is not an exterior code of laws, a list of things allowed and forbidden. It is life that manifests an interior love of God, where it is no longer the father that lives, but Christ that lives in him.
―“Love God and do what you want” says St. Augustine. Because if we love someone, we won’t want to do anything that hurts or displeases them.
―“Love” is a word constantly on the lips of our contemporary world, but it has little idea of what it really is. The flabby thing they have in mind is easily associated with priests, probably because so many of the priests are now flabby, spiritually speaking. It is not so readily associated with the soldier, unless you have in mind the real thing. The real thing, the real love, is what allows a warrior to give his life for a comrade even as it was the reason Jesus Christ died to redeem all men. Jesus Christ, the Man-God, loved. “Greater love no man hath than he who lay down his life for his friends”
Lay down his life for God, Church, Country, Family, Wife and Children.
LOVE OF GOD―above all things. If you love Keep My Commandments.
LOVE OF CHURCH―Common good before the individual good. Where are churchmen today, priests & laity.
LOVE OF COUNTRY―true love of country. Obey God rather than men. Laws in accordance with God’s laws.
LOVE OF FAMILY―microcosm of Church & State.
LOVE OF WIFE―Scripture tells men to love their wives like Christ loved the Church
LOVE OF CHILDREN― “And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.” (Matthew 10:42). “But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea!” (Matthew 18:6).
―In its most elemental form, love is simply to want the best for someone else, to wish him well; in other words, it is what made the Church evangelical once upon a time. That is, when it was understood that it is not loving to let a man persist in religious error or utter spiritual absurdities. Now it is thought that the loving thing is not to speak of hell, or at least not to speak of it as if anyone goes there.
―Love is also the font of justice. When fathers were still men enough to inflict punishment on their sons, it is what they were getting at when they said, “This hurts me more than it hurts you.” Also the phrase that all fathers should remember: “My son, reject not the correction of the Lord: and do not faint when thou art chastised by him: For whom the Lord loveth, he chastiseth: and as a father in the son he pleaseth himself.” (Prov. 3:11-12).
―Sometimes love takes the name of mercy. It is under that name that we have known the love of God since the Fall. In any event, love is what binds men together. “The Lord is gracious and merciful: patient and plenteous in mercy. The Lord is sweet to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.” (Ps.144:8-9).
So the husband and father must be above all a man of God who has to lead his family to God, and who must be seen to be living by Faith, Hope and Charity.
―By renouncing our way of seeing things and by adhering to God’s way of seeing them―this is Faith.
―By renouncing the pursuit of earthly goods in order to elevate ourselves to what God desires for us; namely, heaven, our sanctification and by having confidence in the strength of God’s grace―this is Hope.
―By deciding to love God above self and all else; by bringing our will into conformity with God’s; by loving our neighbor as Jesus loves him; in giving our lives for our brethren―this is Charity.
Article 19
A Selfless Man of Strength and Virtue
A Selfless Man of Strength and Virtue
A Man Who Puts the Common Good above the Individual Good
► The chief cause of marital breakup, or unhappiness in marriage and families is selfishness (which is really a disguised form of childishness).
► Sometimes marriage problems are not truly marriage problems. The fault often lies with the individual who puts himself first . . . before God, before his wife and before his children.
► This selfishness is most evident in the husband who wants to achieve his own satisfaction and his own happiness first, or in the woman who puts her own happiness, her own “fulfillment” before that of her husband and her children.
► Only God can correctly teach us and demand sublimation of ourselves and of our individual lives in the interests of that deeper and wider life that we have in common in marriage.
► Only God can instruct us, and only Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother and St. Joseph can give us the example of how we should work this out in our daily lives.
► Selfishness can be converted to unselfishness if we focus our attention upon God our Creator and firmly resolve to keep God's laws.
► If married couples work towards this beautiful unselfishness in which they think not first of themselves, but rather of God, their spouse and their children, they will not only be sanctified, but will find the greatest degree of happiness that may be allotted to man in this “valley of tears”.
► It is the great irony that unselfishness leads to a greater degree of happiness than selfishness. The secular world views this differently. The more we pursue our own gratification, says the world, the happier we will be.
► Just the reverse is true. The more we seek our own gratification at the expense of others, the unhappier we become, and, paradoxically, the less complete and fulfilled as a human being. Good moral principles always win out in the end.
► Selfish human whims lead to a psychological wrecking ground. Some people hop from one garden to another trying to find the elusive bird of happiness while, as always, it can be found in one's own backyard.
A Man with Strength of Mind
► Healthy principles will form a healthy, strong mind. Yet that presupposes learning. And learning means taking time to study, understand, remember those things.
► The mind should first and foremost be filled with heavenly knowledge. For as the Imitation of Christ says: “All men naturally desire to know, but what does knowledge avail without the fear of God. Indeed a humble husbandman, that serves God, is better than a proud philosopher, who neglecting himself, considers the course of the heavens. Leave off that excessive desire of knowing, because there is found therein much distraction and deceit” (Bk. 1, ch.2).
A Man with Strength of Will
► First of all the will has to be given the right information as what it should pursue.
► God says one thing. The world says another.
► Some men know what they ought to do, but don’t do it. Their will is weak and flabby. They may have muscles of steel, but the muscle of their will is worse than a baby’s.
► The will has been thus weakened by Original Sin. Human nature was wounded, the intelligence dimmed, the will weakened.
► Grace perfects nature. Grace normally comes to us through: Prayer, the Sacraments, Good Works and Sacrifices.
A Man of Virtue
► IN VIRTUE: Virtue is a manly thing. “Virtus” ― strength. “Vir” ― man. A man must grow in virtue as he grows in strength. As the physical muscles are formed are strengthened, so too must the virtues be formed and strengthened.
► IN PARTICULAR VIRTUES OF:
1. PRAYER: every man who wishes to go to heaven must at least discipline himself to praying every day.
2. SELF-SACRIFICE: However, perhaps none is more important that the quality of self-sacrifice. As far as it concerns our exemplars, the priest and the soldier, its importance to both ought to be sufficiently clear as to require no discussion. For the rest of us to lack this quality is not simply to be a failure as men, and thus a failure at this life, it is to fail at the larger life beyond this one.
► Certainly every man who is a father, and that is most, knows the necessity of self-sacrifice, at least if he is a conscientious father. Just as the Father of a parish has to sacrifice himself for his flock, so the father as head of the domestic church, his family, has the duty to sacrifice self.
► Sometimes the sacrifice is in little things like sitting in a car for an hour watching it rain while a child takes a music lesson. Or better still, sitting and listening while your child massacres what should be a beautiful piece of music.
► Similarly, the sacrifice might mean getting up every morning an hour earlier than he needs to do to make sure the child has a good breakfast, and in order to spare his wife the trouble of it. Maybe it will mean never having the kind of overseas vacations that couples without children can take.
► Willingly, the conscientious father makes such sacrifices and more. He may even lead his entire adult life in misery, and we do not speak of material misery. Take the case of St. Gummarus (sometimes called St. Gommaire). An eighth-century noble in the court of King Pepin, “he married a woman so unreasonable and oppressive that his attempts to rescue his marriage elevated him to heroic sanctity.” (That is according to Coulson's biographical dictionary, The Saints.)
► The life and sacrifice of St. Gummarus will be incomprehensible to very many in a faithless age and society where divorce has become so common that most marriages will fail. It will be incomprehensible because what in this life can be more miserable than a bad marriage? Yet, St. Gummarus persevered in his. Too many men today do not because they lack the capacity to sacrifice self.
► We have already said it makes them failures as men, but it also makes them failures at the larger life beyond this one. St. Gummarus was successful. So must be every man in order to fully be a man, and in order one day to see God, for no man ever has that vision except the one who sacrifices self for the sake of it.
Being a man has perhaps never been more difficult than now, but for those who will be, the rewards are incalculable.
3. COURAGE: One quality which men must have, and which is exemplified by the priest and soldier (or should be) is courage, both moral and physical.
► Moral courage has to do with the readiness to take a stand on ground, temporal or spiritual, where others turn tail or neglect their duty.
► As for physical courage, especially in terms of our exemplary figures, the soldier's need to possess it is obvious, but priests also often need it.
► North American Martyrs ... Priests in Reformation England ... Fr. Miguel Pro, murdered by a firing squad with the cry on his lips, “Viva Cristo Rey!” ... St. Thomas à Becket has not been the only bishop to lose his life defending the Faith. The many priests and lay people killed in Communist China after 1949. Or those in the Mexican Civil War.
► Another quality of manhood exemplified by the priest and soldier, but which should mark all men, is discipline of self. As with physical courage, the soldier's need of discipline is obvious. Without it, the army in which he serves becomes a rabble.
A Leader by Word and Example
► LEADERSHIP IS THE FEE EXERCISE OF POWER IN PURSUIT OF THE COMMON GOOD.
1. The common good is not my good or your good, but the good of a particular group in which we live or work or play (family, club, team, parish, city, etc.). It follows that there can be many “common goods” but all of them are subordinated to an ever-riding common good, which is man’s life in society.
2. Common good requires a principle of action that unites. This unity of action aims at the unity a common goal. This unified action is best achieved when the source of unity is found in one man, e.g. a monarchy as opposed to the many members of a democratic government.
3. The exercise of power needs the guidance of prudence. Prudence is the here-and-now exercise of wise and moral decisions in a particular set of circumstances, which are ever changing. E.g. returning shots in a tennis match. Not all shots can be returned the same way.
4. The prudent man not only wills that a particular good be done, but he also knows how to do the good. He knows and masters both himself and others. He sizes up both his and their strengths and bends them in the best possible way of reaching the common goal. For example, a coach will not have the best players, but can still achieve great things if he plays to their strengths and takes account of their weaknesses.
5. The Prudent man knows how to exercise power by the proper use of its only two instruments: persuasion, when it can be brought to bear on intelligent and good men, or force, when it is needed to bring about obedience in persons who are not so good, or even bad.
► The chief cause of marital breakup, or unhappiness in marriage and families is selfishness (which is really a disguised form of childishness).
► Sometimes marriage problems are not truly marriage problems. The fault often lies with the individual who puts himself first . . . before God, before his wife and before his children.
► This selfishness is most evident in the husband who wants to achieve his own satisfaction and his own happiness first, or in the woman who puts her own happiness, her own “fulfillment” before that of her husband and her children.
► Only God can correctly teach us and demand sublimation of ourselves and of our individual lives in the interests of that deeper and wider life that we have in common in marriage.
► Only God can instruct us, and only Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother and St. Joseph can give us the example of how we should work this out in our daily lives.
► Selfishness can be converted to unselfishness if we focus our attention upon God our Creator and firmly resolve to keep God's laws.
► If married couples work towards this beautiful unselfishness in which they think not first of themselves, but rather of God, their spouse and their children, they will not only be sanctified, but will find the greatest degree of happiness that may be allotted to man in this “valley of tears”.
► It is the great irony that unselfishness leads to a greater degree of happiness than selfishness. The secular world views this differently. The more we pursue our own gratification, says the world, the happier we will be.
► Just the reverse is true. The more we seek our own gratification at the expense of others, the unhappier we become, and, paradoxically, the less complete and fulfilled as a human being. Good moral principles always win out in the end.
► Selfish human whims lead to a psychological wrecking ground. Some people hop from one garden to another trying to find the elusive bird of happiness while, as always, it can be found in one's own backyard.
A Man with Strength of Mind
► Healthy principles will form a healthy, strong mind. Yet that presupposes learning. And learning means taking time to study, understand, remember those things.
► The mind should first and foremost be filled with heavenly knowledge. For as the Imitation of Christ says: “All men naturally desire to know, but what does knowledge avail without the fear of God. Indeed a humble husbandman, that serves God, is better than a proud philosopher, who neglecting himself, considers the course of the heavens. Leave off that excessive desire of knowing, because there is found therein much distraction and deceit” (Bk. 1, ch.2).
A Man with Strength of Will
► First of all the will has to be given the right information as what it should pursue.
► God says one thing. The world says another.
► Some men know what they ought to do, but don’t do it. Their will is weak and flabby. They may have muscles of steel, but the muscle of their will is worse than a baby’s.
► The will has been thus weakened by Original Sin. Human nature was wounded, the intelligence dimmed, the will weakened.
► Grace perfects nature. Grace normally comes to us through: Prayer, the Sacraments, Good Works and Sacrifices.
A Man of Virtue
► IN VIRTUE: Virtue is a manly thing. “Virtus” ― strength. “Vir” ― man. A man must grow in virtue as he grows in strength. As the physical muscles are formed are strengthened, so too must the virtues be formed and strengthened.
► IN PARTICULAR VIRTUES OF:
1. PRAYER: every man who wishes to go to heaven must at least discipline himself to praying every day.
2. SELF-SACRIFICE: However, perhaps none is more important that the quality of self-sacrifice. As far as it concerns our exemplars, the priest and the soldier, its importance to both ought to be sufficiently clear as to require no discussion. For the rest of us to lack this quality is not simply to be a failure as men, and thus a failure at this life, it is to fail at the larger life beyond this one.
► Certainly every man who is a father, and that is most, knows the necessity of self-sacrifice, at least if he is a conscientious father. Just as the Father of a parish has to sacrifice himself for his flock, so the father as head of the domestic church, his family, has the duty to sacrifice self.
► Sometimes the sacrifice is in little things like sitting in a car for an hour watching it rain while a child takes a music lesson. Or better still, sitting and listening while your child massacres what should be a beautiful piece of music.
► Similarly, the sacrifice might mean getting up every morning an hour earlier than he needs to do to make sure the child has a good breakfast, and in order to spare his wife the trouble of it. Maybe it will mean never having the kind of overseas vacations that couples without children can take.
► Willingly, the conscientious father makes such sacrifices and more. He may even lead his entire adult life in misery, and we do not speak of material misery. Take the case of St. Gummarus (sometimes called St. Gommaire). An eighth-century noble in the court of King Pepin, “he married a woman so unreasonable and oppressive that his attempts to rescue his marriage elevated him to heroic sanctity.” (That is according to Coulson's biographical dictionary, The Saints.)
► The life and sacrifice of St. Gummarus will be incomprehensible to very many in a faithless age and society where divorce has become so common that most marriages will fail. It will be incomprehensible because what in this life can be more miserable than a bad marriage? Yet, St. Gummarus persevered in his. Too many men today do not because they lack the capacity to sacrifice self.
► We have already said it makes them failures as men, but it also makes them failures at the larger life beyond this one. St. Gummarus was successful. So must be every man in order to fully be a man, and in order one day to see God, for no man ever has that vision except the one who sacrifices self for the sake of it.
Being a man has perhaps never been more difficult than now, but for those who will be, the rewards are incalculable.
3. COURAGE: One quality which men must have, and which is exemplified by the priest and soldier (or should be) is courage, both moral and physical.
► Moral courage has to do with the readiness to take a stand on ground, temporal or spiritual, where others turn tail or neglect their duty.
► As for physical courage, especially in terms of our exemplary figures, the soldier's need to possess it is obvious, but priests also often need it.
► North American Martyrs ... Priests in Reformation England ... Fr. Miguel Pro, murdered by a firing squad with the cry on his lips, “Viva Cristo Rey!” ... St. Thomas à Becket has not been the only bishop to lose his life defending the Faith. The many priests and lay people killed in Communist China after 1949. Or those in the Mexican Civil War.
► Another quality of manhood exemplified by the priest and soldier, but which should mark all men, is discipline of self. As with physical courage, the soldier's need of discipline is obvious. Without it, the army in which he serves becomes a rabble.
A Leader by Word and Example
► LEADERSHIP IS THE FEE EXERCISE OF POWER IN PURSUIT OF THE COMMON GOOD.
1. The common good is not my good or your good, but the good of a particular group in which we live or work or play (family, club, team, parish, city, etc.). It follows that there can be many “common goods” but all of them are subordinated to an ever-riding common good, which is man’s life in society.
2. Common good requires a principle of action that unites. This unity of action aims at the unity a common goal. This unified action is best achieved when the source of unity is found in one man, e.g. a monarchy as opposed to the many members of a democratic government.
3. The exercise of power needs the guidance of prudence. Prudence is the here-and-now exercise of wise and moral decisions in a particular set of circumstances, which are ever changing. E.g. returning shots in a tennis match. Not all shots can be returned the same way.
4. The prudent man not only wills that a particular good be done, but he also knows how to do the good. He knows and masters both himself and others. He sizes up both his and their strengths and bends them in the best possible way of reaching the common goal. For example, a coach will not have the best players, but can still achieve great things if he plays to their strengths and takes account of their weaknesses.
5. The Prudent man knows how to exercise power by the proper use of its only two instruments: persuasion, when it can be brought to bear on intelligent and good men, or force, when it is needed to bring about obedience in persons who are not so good, or even bad.
Article 20
The Head of the Family
The Head of the Family
What exactly is “leadership”? How can it be effectively realized in politics, the Church, our society, and in our families?
The first point is, surely, the most fundamental. In Catholic societies, “leadership” normally has the character of paternal government or patriarchy.
The crisis of leadership in our world is traceable, at its roots, to a faulty notion of the principle of fatherhood. This faulty notion of the principle of fatherhood was not solely the fault of fathers. Fatherhood, in one form or another, has been the primary object of attack over the past 400 years, from the Protestant Revolt through the French Revolution to the Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s. It is, precisely, these anti-paternal forces, which have given shape and content to our stunted, sterile, effeminate and ‘fatherless’ civilization.
In the Europe of the not very remote past, all the pinnacles of authority and power, in all the various institutions of society, were occupied by “father figures” or patriarchs. In the political sphere, of course, this position was held by the Christian monarchs.
The fatherly character of the European monarchs manifested itself in many different ways.
First, just as any good must deal with each child equitably in a non-preferential way, so too, in classical European monarchical theory, the king was considered equidistant from all of his subjects.
This is why, in the Austrian Habsburg Monarchy made up of at least 13 major ethnic groups, Emperor Franz Josef could speak 13 different languages.
► Other examples of the “fatherly” character of European Christian monarchy abound. The story is well-known which portrays King St. Louis IX of France sitting under a tree hearing the honest complaints of his “children.”
► In Imperial Russia, when contempt for and animosity against the local administrators flourished, the people would often repeat the saying: “If only the Czar knew, he would help us!” Indeed, the common Russian term for the Czar was “Little Father.”
► In the political sphere, the paternal leadership of the ancient Christian monarchies was ended by professional politicians who were followed an anti-patriarchal ideology. The 20th century saw the emergence of popular politicians who used the apparatus of the state to vastly increase their own personal power, thus becoming “big brothers.” Because of the present nature of our political system in the Western world, no true, responsible, affectionate political leaders can emerge. The short terms of office, the fixation on winning re-election, the fact that political leaders are often mere puppets of “money-men” and the general superficial and hypocritical nature of politics will not produce such good fruit.
Man ‘the Leader’ is Merely God’s Representative
► The Man is to the Family like a Priest is to his Parish, or Bishop is to his Diocese, or a King to his Kingdom
1. If our home is a temple, it must have a priest.
This priest is the father of the family. This is implied by St. Paul when he says: “The head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3). St. John Chrysostom said it openly when he addressed the men of Antioch and Constantinople with these words: “Convert your homes into churches, repeating in them what you have heard and seen in church.”
St. Augustine goes even further, saying that the husband is more than a priest―he is a bishop, since he is the one who should teach holy doctrine. We have lost this idea of married life. Contrary to the Church’s mind, we now usually see that religion is under the care of the wife, not of the man. She is the one who usually teaches catechism, prays with the children, who takes care that everybody goes to Mass. St. Paul and the Fathers say it is the man who is supposed to teach the children, lead family prayers, and who represents Our Lord in his home. And it is because men neglect this office that women feel the need to “take over” and do the job that otherwise no one will do.
So we see that the natural function and role of the head, of the man, had been lost in our religion at home. It is the heart―it is the woman―who is doing the job of teaching, of leading, but it is not her function! The heart is not to do the job of the head!
So religion has become almost exclusively something of the heart. The only thing we keep in our homes is a kind of sentimental religious feeling. This is because of the failure of men to lead the religious life of the family―to teach and enlighten the heart and the members of the family body about the mysteries of Christ.
Religion is for everybody, but for each one in different ways and with different roles―we aren’t liberals! The role of the man is to be the head, to lead the family. The role of the women is to support and give tenderness and sweetness to the message of the man. The role of the children is obviously to learn. But if the boys don’t see their father teaching them and praying with them, they will abandon the things of God “because religion is for women.”
2. If our home is a temple, it should be a place of prayer.
If our home is a temple, it must have not only a priest, but it should be a place of prayer, and not just of “individualistic” prayer, like that of the Protestants, trying to arrange business with God on their own. No, the home should be a place of personal and of common prayer―father, mother and the children.
Thank God we have kept from the past somehow this ideal when we gather together at home to celebrate “in common” the great feasts of the Church, like Christmas and Easter. It is sad that we have made that celebration something of a mere social activity. We have lost the idea of, after celebrating the feast at our local parish church, bringing this celebration into our small temple, into the mini-church of our home.
We should, for example, pray the Rosary in common, say morning and night prayers together, under the leadership of the husband. Keep the custom of saying grace before meals, as an expression of the sanctification of daily things. For morning and night prayers we could use those of Mother Church herself. Obviously we cannot expect that they will be said in Latin or in their full length in all cases. But we can make a simplification and a good translation of Prime and Compline, for example. As Archbishop Lefebvre says, “there is no better or more beautiful prayer than the prayer of the Church.”
3. If our homes are temples they should be places of sacrifice.
And if a place of sacrifice, there must be a victim. Who is this victim? ― Each one of the members of the family. We have, even among traditionalists this wrong Hollywood idea of marriage: “If you want to enjoy yourself, get married!” This is just not true. Married life is not a “honeymoon” affair. Marriage, as we have said, is a sacrament, and any sacrament gives us the graces that flow from the Cross, and from the Cross alone. Marriage is another way to and of the Cross. To choose marriage is to sacrifice yourself as another Christ, knowing that the way of the Cross is the only way to Heaven.
All these considerations that we have made concerning our home life, are confirmed by today’s Epistle where St. Paul says to the Colossians: “Brethren, put ye on therefore, as the elect of God, holy, and beloved, the bowels of mercy, benignity, humility, modesty, patience: bearing with one another and forgiving one another . . .”
So, you see that our home should really be a place of self sacrifice, and he goes on: “But above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection. And let the peace of Christ rejoice in your hearts, where also you are called in one body.” And thus we see that through the self-sacrifice that charity requires, we will attain peace, joy, and unity in our family.
St. Paul then speaks of our first and second considerations, namely, that our homes should be a place of teaching and learning the Catholic doctrine, and of common prayer: “Let the word of Christ swell in you abundantly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns and spiritual canticles, singing in grace in your hearts to God.” Thus St. Paul describes the prayer in common of the family like that of the Church’s Liturgy.
Let us therefore apply this Catholic and solid ideal of family life in our homes, and then we will see by our own experience how true are the words with which Mother Church describes our home-temples in the Introit: “How lovely are Thy tabernacles, O Lord of Hosts! My soul longeth and fainteth for the courts of the Lord!”
Power and Authority come from God―Said Jesus to Pilate
Our Lord pointed out to Pontius Pilate that ALL authority ultimately comes from God: “Thou shouldst not have any power against me, unless it were given thee from above!” (John 19:11). “Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are [in power], are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation” (Romans 13:1).
Yet those in power, have to use that power in a godly way, according to laws, commandments and will of God:
St. Paul writes to Timothy (1 Timothy 3:1-6) of what a bishop should be: “It is fitting that a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behavior, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, not being puffed up with pride. Not given to wine, no striker, but modest, not quarrelsome, not covetous: but one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity. But if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God?”
(2 Timothy 3:1-17) “Know also this, that in the last days shall come dangerous times. Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness, traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasure more than of God―having an appearance indeed of godliness but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid! For of these sort are they who creep into houses and lead captive silly women laden with sins, who are led away with divers desires―ever learning and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth. But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned and which have been committed to thee. Knowing of whom thou hast learned them: And because from thy infancy thou hast known the Holy Scriptures which can instruct thee to salvation by the Faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice: That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.”
The first point is, surely, the most fundamental. In Catholic societies, “leadership” normally has the character of paternal government or patriarchy.
The crisis of leadership in our world is traceable, at its roots, to a faulty notion of the principle of fatherhood. This faulty notion of the principle of fatherhood was not solely the fault of fathers. Fatherhood, in one form or another, has been the primary object of attack over the past 400 years, from the Protestant Revolt through the French Revolution to the Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s. It is, precisely, these anti-paternal forces, which have given shape and content to our stunted, sterile, effeminate and ‘fatherless’ civilization.
In the Europe of the not very remote past, all the pinnacles of authority and power, in all the various institutions of society, were occupied by “father figures” or patriarchs. In the political sphere, of course, this position was held by the Christian monarchs.
The fatherly character of the European monarchs manifested itself in many different ways.
First, just as any good must deal with each child equitably in a non-preferential way, so too, in classical European monarchical theory, the king was considered equidistant from all of his subjects.
This is why, in the Austrian Habsburg Monarchy made up of at least 13 major ethnic groups, Emperor Franz Josef could speak 13 different languages.
► Other examples of the “fatherly” character of European Christian monarchy abound. The story is well-known which portrays King St. Louis IX of France sitting under a tree hearing the honest complaints of his “children.”
► In Imperial Russia, when contempt for and animosity against the local administrators flourished, the people would often repeat the saying: “If only the Czar knew, he would help us!” Indeed, the common Russian term for the Czar was “Little Father.”
► In the political sphere, the paternal leadership of the ancient Christian monarchies was ended by professional politicians who were followed an anti-patriarchal ideology. The 20th century saw the emergence of popular politicians who used the apparatus of the state to vastly increase their own personal power, thus becoming “big brothers.” Because of the present nature of our political system in the Western world, no true, responsible, affectionate political leaders can emerge. The short terms of office, the fixation on winning re-election, the fact that political leaders are often mere puppets of “money-men” and the general superficial and hypocritical nature of politics will not produce such good fruit.
Man ‘the Leader’ is Merely God’s Representative
► The Man is to the Family like a Priest is to his Parish, or Bishop is to his Diocese, or a King to his Kingdom
1. If our home is a temple, it must have a priest.
This priest is the father of the family. This is implied by St. Paul when he says: “The head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3). St. John Chrysostom said it openly when he addressed the men of Antioch and Constantinople with these words: “Convert your homes into churches, repeating in them what you have heard and seen in church.”
St. Augustine goes even further, saying that the husband is more than a priest―he is a bishop, since he is the one who should teach holy doctrine. We have lost this idea of married life. Contrary to the Church’s mind, we now usually see that religion is under the care of the wife, not of the man. She is the one who usually teaches catechism, prays with the children, who takes care that everybody goes to Mass. St. Paul and the Fathers say it is the man who is supposed to teach the children, lead family prayers, and who represents Our Lord in his home. And it is because men neglect this office that women feel the need to “take over” and do the job that otherwise no one will do.
So we see that the natural function and role of the head, of the man, had been lost in our religion at home. It is the heart―it is the woman―who is doing the job of teaching, of leading, but it is not her function! The heart is not to do the job of the head!
So religion has become almost exclusively something of the heart. The only thing we keep in our homes is a kind of sentimental religious feeling. This is because of the failure of men to lead the religious life of the family―to teach and enlighten the heart and the members of the family body about the mysteries of Christ.
Religion is for everybody, but for each one in different ways and with different roles―we aren’t liberals! The role of the man is to be the head, to lead the family. The role of the women is to support and give tenderness and sweetness to the message of the man. The role of the children is obviously to learn. But if the boys don’t see their father teaching them and praying with them, they will abandon the things of God “because religion is for women.”
2. If our home is a temple, it should be a place of prayer.
If our home is a temple, it must have not only a priest, but it should be a place of prayer, and not just of “individualistic” prayer, like that of the Protestants, trying to arrange business with God on their own. No, the home should be a place of personal and of common prayer―father, mother and the children.
Thank God we have kept from the past somehow this ideal when we gather together at home to celebrate “in common” the great feasts of the Church, like Christmas and Easter. It is sad that we have made that celebration something of a mere social activity. We have lost the idea of, after celebrating the feast at our local parish church, bringing this celebration into our small temple, into the mini-church of our home.
We should, for example, pray the Rosary in common, say morning and night prayers together, under the leadership of the husband. Keep the custom of saying grace before meals, as an expression of the sanctification of daily things. For morning and night prayers we could use those of Mother Church herself. Obviously we cannot expect that they will be said in Latin or in their full length in all cases. But we can make a simplification and a good translation of Prime and Compline, for example. As Archbishop Lefebvre says, “there is no better or more beautiful prayer than the prayer of the Church.”
3. If our homes are temples they should be places of sacrifice.
And if a place of sacrifice, there must be a victim. Who is this victim? ― Each one of the members of the family. We have, even among traditionalists this wrong Hollywood idea of marriage: “If you want to enjoy yourself, get married!” This is just not true. Married life is not a “honeymoon” affair. Marriage, as we have said, is a sacrament, and any sacrament gives us the graces that flow from the Cross, and from the Cross alone. Marriage is another way to and of the Cross. To choose marriage is to sacrifice yourself as another Christ, knowing that the way of the Cross is the only way to Heaven.
All these considerations that we have made concerning our home life, are confirmed by today’s Epistle where St. Paul says to the Colossians: “Brethren, put ye on therefore, as the elect of God, holy, and beloved, the bowels of mercy, benignity, humility, modesty, patience: bearing with one another and forgiving one another . . .”
So, you see that our home should really be a place of self sacrifice, and he goes on: “But above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection. And let the peace of Christ rejoice in your hearts, where also you are called in one body.” And thus we see that through the self-sacrifice that charity requires, we will attain peace, joy, and unity in our family.
St. Paul then speaks of our first and second considerations, namely, that our homes should be a place of teaching and learning the Catholic doctrine, and of common prayer: “Let the word of Christ swell in you abundantly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns and spiritual canticles, singing in grace in your hearts to God.” Thus St. Paul describes the prayer in common of the family like that of the Church’s Liturgy.
Let us therefore apply this Catholic and solid ideal of family life in our homes, and then we will see by our own experience how true are the words with which Mother Church describes our home-temples in the Introit: “How lovely are Thy tabernacles, O Lord of Hosts! My soul longeth and fainteth for the courts of the Lord!”
Power and Authority come from God―Said Jesus to Pilate
Our Lord pointed out to Pontius Pilate that ALL authority ultimately comes from God: “Thou shouldst not have any power against me, unless it were given thee from above!” (John 19:11). “Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are [in power], are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation” (Romans 13:1).
Yet those in power, have to use that power in a godly way, according to laws, commandments and will of God:
St. Paul writes to Timothy (1 Timothy 3:1-6) of what a bishop should be: “It is fitting that a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behavior, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, not being puffed up with pride. Not given to wine, no striker, but modest, not quarrelsome, not covetous: but one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity. But if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God?”
(2 Timothy 3:1-17) “Know also this, that in the last days shall come dangerous times. Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness, traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasure more than of God―having an appearance indeed of godliness but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid! For of these sort are they who creep into houses and lead captive silly women laden with sins, who are led away with divers desires―ever learning and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth. But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned and which have been committed to thee. Knowing of whom thou hast learned them: And because from thy infancy thou hast known the Holy Scriptures which can instruct thee to salvation by the Faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice: That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.”
Article 21
A Letter to Young Married Couples
A Letter to Young Married Couples
As everyone knows, marriage is a contract, realised between a man and a woman, through which each gives him/herself to the other for always. And the ring which they receive on this occasion manifests to the eyes of all, a profound reality: the couple are linked together for life, they are indissolubly united. Their union is permanent, it can be broken only by the death of one of the two spouses.
It is necessary today to have clear and exact ideas on this indissolubility, to better live and to better defend the sanctity of marriage.
It is important first to understand why this contract is permanent, whereas so many others can be rescinded, then we must look at the fruits of this lifelong commitment.
Three purposes can be held for the indissolubility of marriage:
► First of all, marriage is the explicit Will of the Creator, the Author of human life, and of the contract which links two human lives in view of procreation. Our Lord replied to the Pharisees: “Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, made them male and female? And he said: For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4-6).
This last phrase signifies that the conjugal link is formed by the aid of the human will and of the Divine Will. Which is to say that, at the same time as the spouses contract marriage, God ratifies this marriage, in such a way that to His eyes these two people make only one flesh, one family. Consequently, no human authority is able to break this contract which has been confirmed and “signed” by the highest authority possible: God. Pius XI recalls this law of indissolubility in his encyclical “Casti Connubii”.
“The word of the Lord: What God has joined together, no man may put asunder, has been said of the marriage of our first parents, that is to say of the prototype of every marriage to come. In this way therefore, from the beginning in the mind of God, marriage was to reproduce the indissoluble union of His Son with human nature, a union which is permanent since Our Lord ascended into Heaven with His human nature. This first purpose concerns all men, since it is the Divine natural law. That is why the marriage contracted between two infidels is valid and indissoluble. Why has God wanted indissolubility in marriage? To protect the children and their education, for the perfection of the husband and wife, and equally for the prosperity of the State through the stability of families.”
► The second purpose for the indissolubility of marriage concerns only Catholics. It is because of the Sacrament, which raises this union of the husband and wife, by modelling it on the union of Christ and the Church. Pius XI taught: “In a Christian and consummated marriage, the matrimonial pact has received its perfection (because of the Sacrament). At the same time by the Will of God, the greatest stability and the greatest indissolubility shines there and no human authority can undermine it. Just as the union of Christ and the Church is indissoluble: Christ will never found another Church, He will never abandon it; so the union of a married couple must conform with the model, must be indissoluble.”
► The third purpose has something of the same nature as the human heart which aspires after an absolute: the total and permanent gift of oneself through love. It is a reflection of the eternal relationship which exists between the Divine Persons to form one single family. Moreover, the end of marriage being procreation, the child requires for its harmonious and well-balanced development, the stable and united presence of those who have given him life. These last arguments are often better appreciated, because they are at once evident.
Let us see now the fruits of this lifelong commitment, in order to better love these apparent chains, which, very far from strangling the couple, protect them.
► First of all, this permanent commitment requires each spouse to grow in stature morally. In effect, there are necessarily in the conjugal life some difficult periods, or times of misunderstanding, of disappointment, indeed of opposition. The easy answer is to seek elsewhere, in another spouse, for the joys and support which are missing; it is to separate to settle in a life which seems more peaceful and more independent. It is ultimately giving in to one’s caprices and self-will. Fleeing from difficulty, is that virtue, is that growing in stature? No, it is demeaning! Indissolubility requires, on the contrary, the practise of the virtues of patience, forgiveness, self-sacrifice, hope and fortitude, and so each trial which one must overcome ― because one has no choice, because one really must live a peaceful and agreeable common life ― requires each spouse to surpass him/herself, to give a greater measure of virtue. And that, is growing in stature! Even the thought of separation must not be considered as a solution, otherwise you will have great difficulty in overcoming trials and you may not even truly recover. Life becomes unbearable if you permit yourself a way out, because then you exaggerate, you magnify instead of looking for solutions. Separation is a very great evil: it puts spouses into the dangers of incontinence, it’s a great calamity for the education of children, it abolishes the means of sanctification of the common life, it is a form of scandal for the family circle. In practice the Church has always made every effort to prevent this extremity from occurring, and apart from adultery, from grave dangers for the body or the soul of the innocent spouse, it is necessary to have recourse to the normal ordinance.
This permanent link is still the necessary condition for a good education. Whether you like it or not, there is a profound and irreplaceable bond between the father and his child, between the mother and her child. The child needs both of them, living together in harmony. And it’s not because harmony between the couple is not easy, that they must part. No. You must set yourself this harmonious objective for the well-being of the children and that’s what constitutes indissolubility. Everyone knows what “education” a child gets who is alternately in his father’s house then in his mother’s, all the more so since the parents are not able to exercise a complementary authority. And then if someone is imposed on the child who has not given birth to him, all the aspects of his personality will not be able to blossom out, in particular the filial love which causes him to accept that parents have the right to affection and to chastise. That is why the child will say: “Anyway, you are not my mother!” And besides the person who hasn’t begotten this child will never have a truly maternal or paternal attitude, he will never be their child, they will not feel the same responsibility, they will not have the same understanding of the child. These last remarks apply very often to remarriages or to a marriage in which there is the child of another.
The indissolubility of marriage is also a great good for society, because this stability gives it well-balanced personalities. The emotional imbalance which divorce causes expresses itself most of the time by immorality and instability, two nuisance factors to occupational activity. Without counting the loss of the sense of authority, of duty.
Let us add that divorce is lunacy, because it destroys that which has taken so much time, and so much effort, to build: family life. It was invested with all its attributes and all for nothing: the passions are going to reduce it all to nothingness. It’s unreasonable!
Some people will raise an objection, however: but it is not unusual to note that a second marriage is a better success than the first, because one has more experience of life, one commits oneself with more maturity. That is sometimes so, from the point of view of harmony and complementary characters. But it is nevertheless true that children are the innocent victims and, moreover, if marriage was on a trial basis, the seriousness which one must bring to the marriage and the prudence in the choice of spouse would be ruined, and there would be less and less good marriages, to the advantage of affairs.
And what must be particularly understood is that in life there are some essential and fundamental values which come from God ― and marriage is one of them ― for which one must be capable of sacrificing one’s own particular situation, to conserve the principle and to transmit it in its purity and its integrity to future generations.
Therefore, married couples must:
● on the one hand, to the willing determination, to the heartfelt conviction, of never agreeing to this thought of divorce appearing at the moment of adversity;
● on the other hand, to invest well in the family, to devote oneself to it, not to be vulnerable to the opportunities which the world suggests, to the passions which the world knows how to arouse. If one does not live one’s marriage in depth, one is weakened, and the strength of the passions or the weight of adversities can, one day, shatter this so holy institution.
It is necessary today to have clear and exact ideas on this indissolubility, to better live and to better defend the sanctity of marriage.
It is important first to understand why this contract is permanent, whereas so many others can be rescinded, then we must look at the fruits of this lifelong commitment.
Three purposes can be held for the indissolubility of marriage:
► First of all, marriage is the explicit Will of the Creator, the Author of human life, and of the contract which links two human lives in view of procreation. Our Lord replied to the Pharisees: “Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, made them male and female? And he said: For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4-6).
This last phrase signifies that the conjugal link is formed by the aid of the human will and of the Divine Will. Which is to say that, at the same time as the spouses contract marriage, God ratifies this marriage, in such a way that to His eyes these two people make only one flesh, one family. Consequently, no human authority is able to break this contract which has been confirmed and “signed” by the highest authority possible: God. Pius XI recalls this law of indissolubility in his encyclical “Casti Connubii”.
“The word of the Lord: What God has joined together, no man may put asunder, has been said of the marriage of our first parents, that is to say of the prototype of every marriage to come. In this way therefore, from the beginning in the mind of God, marriage was to reproduce the indissoluble union of His Son with human nature, a union which is permanent since Our Lord ascended into Heaven with His human nature. This first purpose concerns all men, since it is the Divine natural law. That is why the marriage contracted between two infidels is valid and indissoluble. Why has God wanted indissolubility in marriage? To protect the children and their education, for the perfection of the husband and wife, and equally for the prosperity of the State through the stability of families.”
► The second purpose for the indissolubility of marriage concerns only Catholics. It is because of the Sacrament, which raises this union of the husband and wife, by modelling it on the union of Christ and the Church. Pius XI taught: “In a Christian and consummated marriage, the matrimonial pact has received its perfection (because of the Sacrament). At the same time by the Will of God, the greatest stability and the greatest indissolubility shines there and no human authority can undermine it. Just as the union of Christ and the Church is indissoluble: Christ will never found another Church, He will never abandon it; so the union of a married couple must conform with the model, must be indissoluble.”
► The third purpose has something of the same nature as the human heart which aspires after an absolute: the total and permanent gift of oneself through love. It is a reflection of the eternal relationship which exists between the Divine Persons to form one single family. Moreover, the end of marriage being procreation, the child requires for its harmonious and well-balanced development, the stable and united presence of those who have given him life. These last arguments are often better appreciated, because they are at once evident.
Let us see now the fruits of this lifelong commitment, in order to better love these apparent chains, which, very far from strangling the couple, protect them.
► First of all, this permanent commitment requires each spouse to grow in stature morally. In effect, there are necessarily in the conjugal life some difficult periods, or times of misunderstanding, of disappointment, indeed of opposition. The easy answer is to seek elsewhere, in another spouse, for the joys and support which are missing; it is to separate to settle in a life which seems more peaceful and more independent. It is ultimately giving in to one’s caprices and self-will. Fleeing from difficulty, is that virtue, is that growing in stature? No, it is demeaning! Indissolubility requires, on the contrary, the practise of the virtues of patience, forgiveness, self-sacrifice, hope and fortitude, and so each trial which one must overcome ― because one has no choice, because one really must live a peaceful and agreeable common life ― requires each spouse to surpass him/herself, to give a greater measure of virtue. And that, is growing in stature! Even the thought of separation must not be considered as a solution, otherwise you will have great difficulty in overcoming trials and you may not even truly recover. Life becomes unbearable if you permit yourself a way out, because then you exaggerate, you magnify instead of looking for solutions. Separation is a very great evil: it puts spouses into the dangers of incontinence, it’s a great calamity for the education of children, it abolishes the means of sanctification of the common life, it is a form of scandal for the family circle. In practice the Church has always made every effort to prevent this extremity from occurring, and apart from adultery, from grave dangers for the body or the soul of the innocent spouse, it is necessary to have recourse to the normal ordinance.
This permanent link is still the necessary condition for a good education. Whether you like it or not, there is a profound and irreplaceable bond between the father and his child, between the mother and her child. The child needs both of them, living together in harmony. And it’s not because harmony between the couple is not easy, that they must part. No. You must set yourself this harmonious objective for the well-being of the children and that’s what constitutes indissolubility. Everyone knows what “education” a child gets who is alternately in his father’s house then in his mother’s, all the more so since the parents are not able to exercise a complementary authority. And then if someone is imposed on the child who has not given birth to him, all the aspects of his personality will not be able to blossom out, in particular the filial love which causes him to accept that parents have the right to affection and to chastise. That is why the child will say: “Anyway, you are not my mother!” And besides the person who hasn’t begotten this child will never have a truly maternal or paternal attitude, he will never be their child, they will not feel the same responsibility, they will not have the same understanding of the child. These last remarks apply very often to remarriages or to a marriage in which there is the child of another.
The indissolubility of marriage is also a great good for society, because this stability gives it well-balanced personalities. The emotional imbalance which divorce causes expresses itself most of the time by immorality and instability, two nuisance factors to occupational activity. Without counting the loss of the sense of authority, of duty.
Let us add that divorce is lunacy, because it destroys that which has taken so much time, and so much effort, to build: family life. It was invested with all its attributes and all for nothing: the passions are going to reduce it all to nothingness. It’s unreasonable!
Some people will raise an objection, however: but it is not unusual to note that a second marriage is a better success than the first, because one has more experience of life, one commits oneself with more maturity. That is sometimes so, from the point of view of harmony and complementary characters. But it is nevertheless true that children are the innocent victims and, moreover, if marriage was on a trial basis, the seriousness which one must bring to the marriage and the prudence in the choice of spouse would be ruined, and there would be less and less good marriages, to the advantage of affairs.
And what must be particularly understood is that in life there are some essential and fundamental values which come from God ― and marriage is one of them ― for which one must be capable of sacrificing one’s own particular situation, to conserve the principle and to transmit it in its purity and its integrity to future generations.
Therefore, married couples must:
● on the one hand, to the willing determination, to the heartfelt conviction, of never agreeing to this thought of divorce appearing at the moment of adversity;
● on the other hand, to invest well in the family, to devote oneself to it, not to be vulnerable to the opportunities which the world suggests, to the passions which the world knows how to arouse. If one does not live one’s marriage in depth, one is weakened, and the strength of the passions or the weight of adversities can, one day, shatter this so holy institution.
Article 22
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 1 : The Choleric Temperament
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 1 : The Choleric Temperament
|
Choleric Strengths
The Extrovert | The Doer | The Optimist (a) The Choleric's Emotions ● Born leader ● Dynamic and active ● Compulsive need for change ● Must correct wrongs ● Strong-willed and decisive ● Unemotional ● Not easily discouraged ● Independent and self sufficient ● Exudes confidence ● Can run anything (b) The Choleric As A Parent ● Exerts sound leadership ● Establishes Goals ● Motivates family to action ● Knows the right answer ● Organizes household (c) The Choleric At Work ● Goal oriented ● Sees the whole picture ● Organizes well ● Seeks practical solutions ● Moves quickly to action ● Delegates work ● Insists on production ● Makes the goal ● Stimulates activity ● Thrives on opposition (d) The Choleric As a Friend ● Has little need for friends ● Will work for group activity ● Will lead and organize ● Is usually right ● Excels in emergencies |
Weaknesses of a Choleric
The Extrovert | The Doer | The Optimist (a) The Choleric's Emotions ● Bossy ● Impatient ● Quick-tempered ● Can't Relax ● Cannot take a joke about self ● Too impetuous ● Enjoys controversy and arguments ● Won't give up when loosing ● Comes on too strong ● Inflexible ● Is not complimentary ● Dislikes tears and emotions ● Is unsympathetic (b) The Choleric As A Parent ● Tends to over dominate ● Too busy for family ● Gives answers too quickly ● Impatient with poor performance ● Won't let children relax ● May send them into depression (c) The Choleric At Work ● Little tolerance for mistakes ● Doesn't analyze details ● Bored by trivia ● May make rash decisions ● May be rude or tactless ● Manipulates people ● Demanding of others ● End justifies the means ● Work may become his god ● Demands loyalty in the ranks (d) The Choleric As a Friend ● Tends to use people ● Dominates others ● Knows everything ● Decides for others ● Can do everything better ● Is too independent ● Possessive of friends and mate ● Can't say, "I'm Sorry" ● May be right, but unpopular |
Article 23
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 2 : The Sanguine Temperament
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 2 : The Sanguine Temperament
|
Strengths of a Sanguine
The Extrovert | The Talker | The Optimist (a) The Sanguine's Emotions ● Appealing personality ● Talkative, Storyteller ● Life of the Party ● Good sense of humor ● Memory for color ● Physically holds on to listener ● Emotional and demonstrative ● Enthusiastic and expressive ● Cheerful and bubbling over ● Curious ● Good on stage ● Wide-eyed and innocent ● Lives in the present ● Changeable disposition ● Sincere at heart ● Always a child (b) The Sanguine As A Parent ● Makes Home Fun ● Is liked by children's friends ● Turns disaster into humor ● Is the circus master (c) The Sanguine At Work ● Volunteers for Jobs ● Thinks up new activities ● Looks great on the Surface ● Creative and colorful ● Has energy and enthusiasm ● Starts in a flashy way ● Inspires others to join ● Charms others to work (d) The Sanguine As a Friend ● Makes friends easily ● Loves People ● Thrives on compliments ● Seems exciting ● Envied by others ● Doesn't hold grudges ● Apologizes quickly ● Prevents dull moments ● Likes spontaneous activities |
Weaknesses of a Sanguine
The Extrovert | The Talker | The Optimist (a) The Sanguine's Emotions ● Compulsive talker ● Exaggerates and elaborates ● Dwells on trivia ● Can't remember names ● Scares others off ● Too happy for some ● Has restless energy ● Egotistical ● Blusters and complains ● Naive, gets taken in ● Has loud voice and laugh ● Controlled by circumstances ● Gets angry easily ● Seems phony to some ● Never Grows Up (b) The Sanguine As A Parent ● Keeps home in a frenzy ● Forgets children's appointments ● Disorganized ● Doesn't listen to the whole story (c) The Sanguine At Work ● Would rather talk ● forgets obligations ● Doesn't follow through ● Confidence fades fast ● Undisciplined ● Priorities out of order ● Decides by feelings ● Easily distracted ● Wastes time talking (d) The Sanguine As a Friend ● Hates to be alone ● Needs to be center stage ● Wants to be popular ● Looks for credit ● Dominates conversations ● Interrupts and doesn't listen ● Answers for others ● Fickle and forgetful ● Makes excuses ● Repeats stories |
Article 24
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 3 : The Melancholic Temperament
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 3 : The Melancholic Temperament
|
Strengths of a Melancholy
The Introvert | The Thinker | The Pessimist (a) The Melancholy's Emotions ● Deep and thoughtfully ● Analytical ● Serious and purposeful ● Genius prone ● Talented and creative ● Artistic or musical ● Philosophical and poetic ● Appreciative of beauty ● Sensitive to others ● Self-sacrificing ● Conscientious ● Idealistic (b) The Melancholy As A Parent ● Sets high standards ● Wants everything done right ● Keeps home in good order ● Picks up after children ● Sacrifices own will for others ● Encourages scholarship and talent (c) The Melancholy At Work ● Schedule oriented ● Perfectionist, high standards ● Detail conscious ● Persistent and thorough ● Orderly and organized ● Neat and tidy ● Economical ● Sees the problems ● Finds creative solutions ● Needs to finish what he starts ● Likes charts, graphs, figures, lists (d) The Melancholy As a Friend ● Makes friends cautiously ● Content to stay in background ● Avoids causing attention ● Faithful and devoted ● Will listen to complaints ● Can solve other's problems ● Deep concern for other people ● Moved to tears with compassion ● Seeks ideal mate |
Weakness of a Melancholy
The Introvert | The Thinker | The Pessimist (a) The Melancholy's Emotions ● Remembers the negatives ● Moody and depressed ● Enjoys being hurt ● Has false humility ● Off in another world ● Low self-image ● Has selective hearing ● Self-centered ● Too introspective ● Guilt feelings ● Persecution complex ● Tends to hypochondria (b) The Melancholy As A Parent ● Puts goals beyond reach ● May discourage children ● May be too meticulous ● Becomes martyr ● Sulks over disagreements ● Puts guilt upon children (c) The Melancholy At Work ● Not people oriented ● Depressed over imperfections ● Chooses difficult work ● Hesitant to start projects ● Spends too much time planning ● Prefers analysis to work ● Self-deprecating ● Hard to please ● Standards often too high ● Deep need for approval (d) The Melancholy As a Friend ● Lives through others ● Insecure socially ● Withdrawn and remote ● Critical of others ● Holds back affections ● Dislikes those in opposition ● Suspicious of people ● Antagonistic and vengeful ● Unforgiving ● Full of contradictions ● Skeptical of compliments |
Article 25
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 4 : The Phlegmatic Temperament
Tempers and Temperaments
Part 4 : The Phlegmatic Temperament
|
Strengths of a Phlegmatic
The Introvert | The Watcher | The Pessimist (a) The Phlegmatic’s Emotions ● Low-key personality ● Easy-going and relaxed ● Calm, cool and collected ● Patient and well-balanced ● Consistent life ● Quiet, but witty ● Sympathetic and kind ● Keeps emotions hidden ● Happily reconciled to life ● All-purpose person (b) The Phlegmatic As A Parent ● Makes a good parent ● Takes time for the children ● Is not in a hurry ● Can take the good with the bad ● Doesn’t get upset easily (c) The Phlegmatic At Work ● Competent and steady ● Peaceful and agreeable ● Has administrative ability ● Mediates problems ● Avoids conflicts ● Good under pressure ● Finds the easy way (d) The Phlegmatic As a Friend ● Easy to get along with ● Pleasant and enjoyable ● Inoffensive ● Good listener ● Dry sense of humor ● Enjoys watching people ● Has many friends ● Has compassion and concern |
Weaknesses of a Phlegmatic
The Introvert | The Watcher | The Pessimist (a) The Phlegmatic’s Emotions ● Unenthusiastic ● Fearful and worried ● Indecisive ● Avoids responsibility ● Quiet will of iron ● Selfish ● Too shy and reticent ● Too compromising ● Self-righteous (b) The Phlegmatic As A Parent ● Lax on discipline ● Doesn’t organize home ● Takes life too easy (c) The Phlegmatic At Work ● Not goal oriented ● Lacks self motivation ● Hard to get moving ● Resents being pushed ● Lazy and careless ● Discourages others ● Would rather watch (d) The Phlegmatic As a Friend ● Dampens enthusiasm ● Stays uninvolved ● Is not exciting ● Indifferent to plans ● Judges others ● Sarcastic and teasing ● Resists change |
Article 26
Stages of Education
Stages of Education
1. THE BABY
The formation of the child, in the first years, is decisive. One can affirm, without fear of being mistaken, that the personality of the child to whom parents will have given good habits in the course of the first five or six years, will develop without big contradictions up to puberty and the young adolescent who will have been guided with wisdom and prudence in the course of the dangerous years of his juvenile transformation will be capable of acquiring qualities which will allow him to realizee at best his adult personality.
The newly-born is gifted with a particular active sensitivity, he is scarcely impressionable only to pleasure and pain; and his first efforts tend to drive away unpleasant sensations and to look avidly for what can give him some pleasure. The baby is the toy of his passions. Because of his unconsciousness, the newly-born pursues pleasure for itself, without any worry of the consequences; he cannot make the distinction between useful and harmful pleasure, between normal satisfaction and excess. In the same way he shies away from every suffering because he cannot distinguish those that are good for his health from the ones that can ruin his health; the ones that are good for forming his will power and those that can be avoided.
The baby is ruled by instinctive appetites that are often selfish. He cries or he laughs, he is afraid or trusting, he likes or detests, his will and his intelligence not being able to appreciate these objects. The child makes a bee-line for what is attractive and shies away from what repels him.
At first one would be tempted to believe that it would be sufficient to allow the child to follow his instincts so that he develops normally. Experience shows that the young of animals are from this point of view more gifted than the young of humans; indeed the instinct of animals leads them straight to their goal, while that of children is subjected to errors, deviations which demand constant surveillance. Why? because, on the one hand, man is not called to guide himself through instinct like animals, but through intelligence, and as long as this faculty is not formed, the light which guides him is missing, and on the other hand, because original sin has injured his passions which have become disordered, meaning not aimed at the goal, at the good of mankind, but oriented towards pleasure.
The young child therefore needs parents who can control, guide and correct his selfish and capricious instincts and give him good habits. Also it is of highest importance to regulate the child’s food and sleep and not to mind his cries and demands and moreover, they will help him in giving his heart a little, in coming out of himself by marks of tenderness. It is the age until the awakening of reason, where physical correction helps him to define clearly what is right or wrong.
2. THE FIRST YEARS
It is the period between the cradle and the awakening of conscience. We are talking about education of the senses, each of the senses will open towards the outside, and little by little will help to know, to form itself. More than joys, one can talk about the exercises of the child, like the cat who learns to hunt with a ball that it rolls and pounces on it; in the same way the child prepares himself for adult life by using his senses, his body. For example, he runs, climbs on the furniture to become more supple, he handles certain objects and practices so that his fingers become nimble and co-ordinated, he builds sand pies to master matter, he draws to develop his sense of observation, he builds with blocks to practice patience or certain inventiveness. Of course the mother can intervene to sustain this formation by making other suggestions but above all to see to the development of four qualities: courage, order, perseverance, diversity.
► COURAGE: by provoking or permitting initiative, more risky games, more difficulties. If the mother is always telling the child off for fear of falling, of hurting himself; she cripples his spirit, his enthusiasm and makes him fainthearted. We must not forget that physical courage will be the foundation of moral and spiritual courage one day.
► ORDER AND TIDINESS by demanding that the child puts back what he has been using. Often the child’s untidiness comes from weakness of the parents who, without asking, tidy everything and thus develop bad habits in the child. Also one must not discourage a child who, to imitate his mother, would like to sweep and clean; let’s take the time and leave him the initiative of cleaning his bedroom for a day.
► PERSEVERANCE by carrying on when it is more difficult in order to achieve some work or a well-done construction. The least failure quickly discourages the child, especially as he tends sometimes to undertake difficult things. In this case the mother should be at his side to encourage him to persevere and to attain success. Little by little the child will fall into the habit of not starting something without finishing it and that will help him a great deal in life.
Together with perseverance, one must develop the taste of a job well done. Through laziness or thoughtlessness the child will be content with half-measures. There again the mother must develop in him the sense of perfection. For example, if he has to make a pie or cut out the picture of a person in a magazine, the mother should help him to start again if the shape is not perfect or the cutting imprecise.
► DIVERSITY of exercises will enable him to use all his senses usefully. Thus he imitates the song of birds to attune his ear and his vocal cords; he draws to have a better look, to observe what is around him, he touches everything to discover how things function, he puts things in his mouth to know them....
The mother will again help him to observe carefully the details of things, to imitate well or to reproduce the real thing, to attune his ear to different sounds, to distinguish differences in size, beauty of objects, to respect the harmony of colors in his drawings and the beauty of shapes....
If one has to vary occupations, because the child is not capable of sustaining the same effort for a long time, one must see to it that he is never unoccupied and that he does not get bored. The child who is always busy does not fall into the habit of laziness, of idleness which as everyone knows is the root of all vices.
To this formation of qualities of which each one will easily understand the importance for the future, must be added self-control of sensuality.
From a tender age, the child sometimes looks avidly for what flatters the taste and provides pleasant sensations to the body.
The mother will see to the regularity and composition of meals, it is not a matter above all of what he likes, but what he needs and he must eat without recrimination what has been cooked without leaving anything on his plate.
Also one must watch motherly caresses, one must not develop an excessive sensuality of the body which is as dangerous as that of the mouth.
This discipline of sensuality will be a great help to the child in the struggles of puberty. Moreover excesses of sensuality result in creating in the child a heaviness of the soul which will weaken his spiritual, intellectual and moral development.
3. CONQUEST OF SUPERIOR FACULTIES
One can consider that this formation extends from six years to adolescence.
The development of senses already gives the child a certain freedom and also a means for expressing himself, for revealing himself.
After winning possession of his senses, the child enters a new phase, that of the development of intelligence which will give him another freedom. It is the period of “whys” which will enable the child to judge, to appreciate things and events.
If problems posed by the child are not answered, he will be left to his own devices and having neither experience nor knowledge, he will be lost in imagination or fantasy or day-dreaming.
Reason, from that age, must be formed by truth, and truth is the reality of things. Let us help children to draw conclusions from facts which concern them, or which they are witnessing.
The art of the educator, is certainly to urge the child to look for the explanation of things and to control if his explanations are true; it is a way of enabling him to ask the “whys” or the “hows” and to find the answers himself on the basis of what he has acquired and on the reality of things.
One must see to it that this judgement is objective, meaning that passions, personal interest do not prejudice it too much.
As his mind awakens, strengthens, understands better, so his will must follow at the same rate, by working at acquiring good habits, it must improve in goodness, take advantage of the lights of intelligence.
Thus, as soon as he understands the importance and necessity of a law, he must work at submitting to it by curbing his temper and whims; or still, as soon as he is aware of the notion of sin, he must uproot it from his life; as soon as he conceives a service, a means of pleasing, he must have the strength to see it through; if he understands the importance of study, he must work; if he knows that memory is a reservoir which will help him to have a better judgement and appreciate events without letting himself be guided by diverse influences, he must cultivate it ...
4. ADOLESCENCE
This period, together with that of the first years of childhood, is certainly the one with the heaviest consequences. Depending on whether it has been a good or bad stage, life will be different. To treat the adolescent like a child is to expose oneself to rebellion which will lead him to do stupid things in order to assert himself; or to expose oneself to make him dependent on his parents by being afraid of the world and personal initiative; or to expose him to dissimulation, to a Jekyll and Hyde attitude; in any case, harm his growth towards adulthood.
We do not bring up our children for ourselves, they must be allowed to make tentative flights, while staying close to them, by helping them to draw lessons from their attitudes, before seeing them flying for good.
It is not by opposing the natural need of independence which is characteristic of the age of personal formation that the educator will succeed in having a beneficial influence on the adolescent, but by making use of this need to develop the sense of responsibility in him.
The practice of authority and sanctions cannot be applied in the same way as for a child. Authority by force should be abandoned but replaced by moral authority which inspires admiration and trust in the child. Admiration plays an important role in the adolescent who is in search of a personality.
It is the age when responsibilities should be given, when one should allow the adolescent to take the initiative. These responsibilities must be real and in a certain way be above his capabilities in order to temper his natural presumption.
He could be made to manage his own budget, involve him in decisions which concern him, give him the responsibility of a job, of looking after his younger brother, of going out with a few chosen friends, of helping an afflicted family ...
One must also realize that the adolescent has his eyes turned only towards the future and lives in a world full of dreams and delusion. He is thus on the threshold of presumption or discouragement, success or failure. One should therefore bring him down to reality and help him to combine his dreams with the present effort.
Finally we notice in the adolescent an air of self-assurance which makes him snub other people’s experience. Patience! One must not check this impetus but orientate it towards less utopic objectives.
The formation of the child, in the first years, is decisive. One can affirm, without fear of being mistaken, that the personality of the child to whom parents will have given good habits in the course of the first five or six years, will develop without big contradictions up to puberty and the young adolescent who will have been guided with wisdom and prudence in the course of the dangerous years of his juvenile transformation will be capable of acquiring qualities which will allow him to realizee at best his adult personality.
The newly-born is gifted with a particular active sensitivity, he is scarcely impressionable only to pleasure and pain; and his first efforts tend to drive away unpleasant sensations and to look avidly for what can give him some pleasure. The baby is the toy of his passions. Because of his unconsciousness, the newly-born pursues pleasure for itself, without any worry of the consequences; he cannot make the distinction between useful and harmful pleasure, between normal satisfaction and excess. In the same way he shies away from every suffering because he cannot distinguish those that are good for his health from the ones that can ruin his health; the ones that are good for forming his will power and those that can be avoided.
The baby is ruled by instinctive appetites that are often selfish. He cries or he laughs, he is afraid or trusting, he likes or detests, his will and his intelligence not being able to appreciate these objects. The child makes a bee-line for what is attractive and shies away from what repels him.
At first one would be tempted to believe that it would be sufficient to allow the child to follow his instincts so that he develops normally. Experience shows that the young of animals are from this point of view more gifted than the young of humans; indeed the instinct of animals leads them straight to their goal, while that of children is subjected to errors, deviations which demand constant surveillance. Why? because, on the one hand, man is not called to guide himself through instinct like animals, but through intelligence, and as long as this faculty is not formed, the light which guides him is missing, and on the other hand, because original sin has injured his passions which have become disordered, meaning not aimed at the goal, at the good of mankind, but oriented towards pleasure.
The young child therefore needs parents who can control, guide and correct his selfish and capricious instincts and give him good habits. Also it is of highest importance to regulate the child’s food and sleep and not to mind his cries and demands and moreover, they will help him in giving his heart a little, in coming out of himself by marks of tenderness. It is the age until the awakening of reason, where physical correction helps him to define clearly what is right or wrong.
2. THE FIRST YEARS
It is the period between the cradle and the awakening of conscience. We are talking about education of the senses, each of the senses will open towards the outside, and little by little will help to know, to form itself. More than joys, one can talk about the exercises of the child, like the cat who learns to hunt with a ball that it rolls and pounces on it; in the same way the child prepares himself for adult life by using his senses, his body. For example, he runs, climbs on the furniture to become more supple, he handles certain objects and practices so that his fingers become nimble and co-ordinated, he builds sand pies to master matter, he draws to develop his sense of observation, he builds with blocks to practice patience or certain inventiveness. Of course the mother can intervene to sustain this formation by making other suggestions but above all to see to the development of four qualities: courage, order, perseverance, diversity.
► COURAGE: by provoking or permitting initiative, more risky games, more difficulties. If the mother is always telling the child off for fear of falling, of hurting himself; she cripples his spirit, his enthusiasm and makes him fainthearted. We must not forget that physical courage will be the foundation of moral and spiritual courage one day.
► ORDER AND TIDINESS by demanding that the child puts back what he has been using. Often the child’s untidiness comes from weakness of the parents who, without asking, tidy everything and thus develop bad habits in the child. Also one must not discourage a child who, to imitate his mother, would like to sweep and clean; let’s take the time and leave him the initiative of cleaning his bedroom for a day.
► PERSEVERANCE by carrying on when it is more difficult in order to achieve some work or a well-done construction. The least failure quickly discourages the child, especially as he tends sometimes to undertake difficult things. In this case the mother should be at his side to encourage him to persevere and to attain success. Little by little the child will fall into the habit of not starting something without finishing it and that will help him a great deal in life.
Together with perseverance, one must develop the taste of a job well done. Through laziness or thoughtlessness the child will be content with half-measures. There again the mother must develop in him the sense of perfection. For example, if he has to make a pie or cut out the picture of a person in a magazine, the mother should help him to start again if the shape is not perfect or the cutting imprecise.
► DIVERSITY of exercises will enable him to use all his senses usefully. Thus he imitates the song of birds to attune his ear and his vocal cords; he draws to have a better look, to observe what is around him, he touches everything to discover how things function, he puts things in his mouth to know them....
The mother will again help him to observe carefully the details of things, to imitate well or to reproduce the real thing, to attune his ear to different sounds, to distinguish differences in size, beauty of objects, to respect the harmony of colors in his drawings and the beauty of shapes....
If one has to vary occupations, because the child is not capable of sustaining the same effort for a long time, one must see to it that he is never unoccupied and that he does not get bored. The child who is always busy does not fall into the habit of laziness, of idleness which as everyone knows is the root of all vices.
To this formation of qualities of which each one will easily understand the importance for the future, must be added self-control of sensuality.
From a tender age, the child sometimes looks avidly for what flatters the taste and provides pleasant sensations to the body.
The mother will see to the regularity and composition of meals, it is not a matter above all of what he likes, but what he needs and he must eat without recrimination what has been cooked without leaving anything on his plate.
Also one must watch motherly caresses, one must not develop an excessive sensuality of the body which is as dangerous as that of the mouth.
This discipline of sensuality will be a great help to the child in the struggles of puberty. Moreover excesses of sensuality result in creating in the child a heaviness of the soul which will weaken his spiritual, intellectual and moral development.
3. CONQUEST OF SUPERIOR FACULTIES
One can consider that this formation extends from six years to adolescence.
The development of senses already gives the child a certain freedom and also a means for expressing himself, for revealing himself.
After winning possession of his senses, the child enters a new phase, that of the development of intelligence which will give him another freedom. It is the period of “whys” which will enable the child to judge, to appreciate things and events.
If problems posed by the child are not answered, he will be left to his own devices and having neither experience nor knowledge, he will be lost in imagination or fantasy or day-dreaming.
Reason, from that age, must be formed by truth, and truth is the reality of things. Let us help children to draw conclusions from facts which concern them, or which they are witnessing.
The art of the educator, is certainly to urge the child to look for the explanation of things and to control if his explanations are true; it is a way of enabling him to ask the “whys” or the “hows” and to find the answers himself on the basis of what he has acquired and on the reality of things.
One must see to it that this judgement is objective, meaning that passions, personal interest do not prejudice it too much.
As his mind awakens, strengthens, understands better, so his will must follow at the same rate, by working at acquiring good habits, it must improve in goodness, take advantage of the lights of intelligence.
Thus, as soon as he understands the importance and necessity of a law, he must work at submitting to it by curbing his temper and whims; or still, as soon as he is aware of the notion of sin, he must uproot it from his life; as soon as he conceives a service, a means of pleasing, he must have the strength to see it through; if he understands the importance of study, he must work; if he knows that memory is a reservoir which will help him to have a better judgement and appreciate events without letting himself be guided by diverse influences, he must cultivate it ...
4. ADOLESCENCE
This period, together with that of the first years of childhood, is certainly the one with the heaviest consequences. Depending on whether it has been a good or bad stage, life will be different. To treat the adolescent like a child is to expose oneself to rebellion which will lead him to do stupid things in order to assert himself; or to expose oneself to make him dependent on his parents by being afraid of the world and personal initiative; or to expose him to dissimulation, to a Jekyll and Hyde attitude; in any case, harm his growth towards adulthood.
We do not bring up our children for ourselves, they must be allowed to make tentative flights, while staying close to them, by helping them to draw lessons from their attitudes, before seeing them flying for good.
It is not by opposing the natural need of independence which is characteristic of the age of personal formation that the educator will succeed in having a beneficial influence on the adolescent, but by making use of this need to develop the sense of responsibility in him.
The practice of authority and sanctions cannot be applied in the same way as for a child. Authority by force should be abandoned but replaced by moral authority which inspires admiration and trust in the child. Admiration plays an important role in the adolescent who is in search of a personality.
It is the age when responsibilities should be given, when one should allow the adolescent to take the initiative. These responsibilities must be real and in a certain way be above his capabilities in order to temper his natural presumption.
He could be made to manage his own budget, involve him in decisions which concern him, give him the responsibility of a job, of looking after his younger brother, of going out with a few chosen friends, of helping an afflicted family ...
One must also realize that the adolescent has his eyes turned only towards the future and lives in a world full of dreams and delusion. He is thus on the threshold of presumption or discouragement, success or failure. One should therefore bring him down to reality and help him to combine his dreams with the present effort.
Finally we notice in the adolescent an air of self-assurance which makes him snub other people’s experience. Patience! One must not check this impetus but orientate it towards less utopic objectives.