Will "Better Science" Save Us? | Wisdom and the Fear of the Lord

The fear of the Lord is the crown of wisdom, making peace and perfect health to flourish. He saw her and apportioned her; he rained down knowledge and discerning comprehension, and he exalted the glory of those who held her fast. To fear the Lord is the root of wisdom, and her branches are long life.  ~ Sirach 1: 18-20 RSV-2CE

What does the fear of the Lord have to do with science? That's the topic we are exploring today. Let's begin with a meme I spotted on social media:

The problem I've repeatedly encountered with memes that attempt to make a profound argument is that the idea will seem to make logical sense at first glance; but upon deeper consideration, it becomes clear that it makes any number of errors in logic, including presenting a false dichotomy or a straw man argument, or it simply fails to reflect the complexity of an issue. I couldn't put my finger on what was off about this meme, but it kept coming back into my mind throughout the day. That evening, as I was reading a book of Marian devotion, I encountered the verses from Sirach posted at the beginning of this article, and the trouble was elucidated. The foundational problem with the meme is perhaps the failure to put first things first. 

Very often in our contemporary Western culture, science is pitted against religion. Yet this is a relatively recent phenomenon in human history. The fact is that Theology was regarded as the Queen of the Sciences and worked hand-in-hand with Philosophy, also a high science. You might say that Theology was the perfection of Philosophy. Western civilization was built upon the marriage of faith and reason, exemplified by the classical Christian thought of St. Thomas Aquinas and his masterpiece, Summa Theologica. 

The artificial division of subjects from one another and over-emphasis on specialization that we find today are earmarks of the dumbing down of education. The Catholic Church founded the institutions of the university and the hospital. The universities in our present era are, by and large, no longer the incubators of critical thought, originality, creativity, holistically integrated studies, pioneering research, and grand aspirations of the human soul. Rather, they are the breeding grounds for the hive mind and radical leftist, atheist ideologies. The very science that we have elevated to golden calf proportions has become an anemic system separated from every other art and science and bereft of a cohesive, life-giving worldview. 

How can we ever hope to rely on "better science" if it's separated from its ultimate source? 

In the Book of Wisdom, King Solomon prays for the gift of Wisdom, via the power of the Holy Spirit, to come to him, and in return he is granted, among other things, perfect scientific knowledge (Wisdom 7: 16-22). Wisdom here, as in other books of the Bible, is personified as a woman and is called sister, bride, and the mother of all good things. As we learned at the top, the fear of the Lord is the root and crown of divine Wisdom. But what is this mysterious "fear of the Lord"?

The fear of the Lord does not refer to the cowering of one who fears the wrath of God, who worries that our Creator will hurl lightning bolts as punishment for our mistakes. The fear of the Lord, which is a divine gift itself, refers to a reverential love of God and a filial desire to please him and avoid sin. The fear of the Lord is the awe and respect for true Religion, manifested in the teachings of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and fulfilled in the Trinitarian belief in one God in three divine persons--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--and the Incarnation of the Son in the person of Jesus Christ, who is both True God and True Man. Without placing this first thing first, any scientific knowledge can only be partial at best, and will likely be riddled with error. We won't know the complete truth until we get to heaven; but as we read in Sacred Scripture, peace and perfect health themselves are bi-products of wisdom.

Jesus said, "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt. 6: 33 KJV). This statement comes at the end of Our Lord's admonition that we should not be anxious about what we will eat or wear or anything else. The first thing is to seek the heavenly kingdom and trust in God for all our needs. Both Solomon's desire for Wisdom, which reflects his fear of the Lord, and Jesus' setting of our priorities are directly applicable to our current coronavirus times. 

As we know from history, scientific knowledge is always in a state of flux. It's in a neverending state of change, revision, and interpretation. Science is not just a set of objective facts. New facts might refute a prior understanding of what were believed to be the facts, and the result might be better science. But if we think that science exists in a vacuum, apart from religion, politics, and human emotions and experience, we are dangerously naive. The scientists themselves form the hypotheses and conduct the experiments they do according to their own sets of preconceived beliefs, hunches, personal experiences, former observations, and any manner of outside influences, including the political, and internal motivations, such as greed and the desire for power. If the scientist is not a purely objective being, which, as a human, he is necessarily not, then it follows that the interpretations of the science will be to some extent subjectively colored. Hence we have what are called scientific opinions. 

As we all know, scientists of relatively equal education and experience in their field can have widely differing opinions. If you find out from a doctor that you have a serious medical condition, a doctor of good character will suggest that you have it confirmed by a second opinion before proceeding with treatment. What we find happening all over the news and social media right now is that any scientific opinion that differs from the WHO, the CDC, and Drs. Fauci and Birx is being categorically labeled as conspiracy theory and violently censored. If you don't think you have the right to any and all information that you might wish to consider when making your own decisions for your health and welfare, and that of others, you need to wake up. This is life and death stuff we are dealing with, and in this atmosphere of conflicting information and opinion, rife with political and emotional manipulation, the lay person needs something more than science upon which to make sound judgments. 

If the Holy Spirit could impart perfect wisdom and discernment, and even perfect scientific knowledge, upon a man who had no university education or medical experience, then he can likewise give anyone who puts the fear of the Lord ahead of all other considerations an awareness of when he is hearing the truth, and when he is being led astray. This guidance will sometimes come as a gut feeling, an intuition, or an "ah-ha" response to something a scientist, politition, or your great aunt Sophie says. Yes, it could indeed even come in the form of a YouTube video! And don't your own education, experiences, intelligence, and powers of observation and common sense count for something? Are we really so incapable of making informed decisions and thinking for ourselves that we must rely entirely on a myriad of expert opinions? Well, that's exactly what a certain atheistic, socialist agenda (viz. regime) would like you to believe. Have some self-respect, people! And in doing so, there is a better chance of being able to respect one another. 

Which scientists do you trust? To mask or not to mask? To glove or not to glove? To draw near one another, or to keep apart? When there are no easy answers, when there are many unknowns, when there is a cacophony of deafening voices and derision, it's all the more imperative that we go to God in prayer, with the fear of the Lord in our hearts, and beg for Wisdom. This is our only hope to be guided in the right direction. This is the better science. 

Doth not Wisdom cry aloud, and prudence put forth her voice? Standing in the top of the highest places by the way, in the midst of the paths, beside the gates of the city, in the very doors she speaketh, saying: O ye men, to you I call, and my voice is to the sons of men. O littles ones, understand subtilty and ye unwise, take notice. Hear, for I will speak of great things: and my lips shall be opened to preach right things. My mouth shall meditate truth, and my lips shall hate wickedness. All my words are just, there is nothing wicked nor perverse in them. They are right to them that understand, and just to them that find knowledge. Receive my instruction, and not money: choose knowledge rather than gold.

By me kings reign, and lawgivers decree just things... I love them that love me: and they that in the morning early watch for me, shall find me... He that shall find me, shall find life, and shall have salvation from the Lord: but he that shall sin against me, shall hurt his own soul. All that hate me love death. 

(Proverbs 8: 1-10, 15, 17, 35-36 DRV)

The Local Parish as Microcosm of the Church

Image from The Village Reporter, Montpelier, OH

A microcosm is a community, place, or situation regarded as encapsulating in miniature the characteristic qualities or features of something much larger. This is the relationship that I believe can exist between a local parish and the universal Catholic Church.

When I shared my distress with my husband a few months ago over the state of the Church and the ongoing revelations of the sex abuse scandal, I was a bit upset with him for not being of like mind with my angst. He hadn't been following any news at all since Donald Trump was elected President of the United States, and I felt like he was sticking his head in the sand. He said something about the "microcosm" of our parish church, how much he likes the people and enjoys the messages, etc., but I wasn't ready to consider his idea then. Now with my realization of having been "frog boiled" by the anti-Pope Francis posse, of having been sucked into the vortex of suspicion and elitism of ultra-traditionalists on social media, I'm totally on board with my husband's approach. 

This fall I joined the Rosary Altar Society, a women's group at our parish. Last evening we hosted our church's annual chili and soup supper for the community on voting day. My family had never attended this event. The food was amazing, and there was a spectacular turn out. I enjoyed being a part of serving our church and our town, bringing people together and nourishing them body and soul. I found the picture at the top of this post on the Internet, of some of our church ladies from the chili/soup supper a few years ago. 

Our parish is small but active, with a lot of young families and people of all ages, and a sister parish in a nearby town with which we share a priest. The Mass is the typical Ordinary Form, complete with Eucharistic ministers and altar servers that include females. Lay men and women serve as commentators and lectors as well. We have a wonderful choir and sing standard hymns. The architecture and decor of the church is humble but homey. It's the stuff the ultra-traditionalists, who believe the Tridentine (Latin) Mass is superior, regularly deride. 

My husband is a lector, our teenage daughter is an altar server, and this year, with the Rosary Altar Society, I've found a place to be of service as well. The people of our parish are kind, friendly, generous, and welcoming. Spirits are fed in this community. Our church evangelizes by providing a home for local Catholics to worship together, and we reach out in love and service to our neighbors. We are simple witnesses to Jesus. And in so being, we build up and heal the Body of Christ. We are a microcosm of what the Church truly is, despite the failures and shortcomings we sometimes see in the news. This is the way of hope. 

So if you are still reeling from all of the negativity that has been brewing during Francis' pontificate, which obscures the good work and powerful message of the Holy Father, the most profound way you can help the Church is to pray, pray, pray, and be a positive member of your local parish. My family's parish is blessed to have an amazing bishop who radiates joy and enthusiasm for the Catholic Faith, so do extend your participation to your larger diocese community if possible. Focus on the grace that you receive from the sacraments, and be deeply thankful if you live in a place where you can regularly receive them. 

Read Pope Francis' own words, rather than relying upon comments taken out of the context; and avoid the interpretations of the news media and self-appointed Catholic policemen of social media. This is a time to make your faith stronger through adversity. When you feel you are suffering, offer that up for the poor souls in purgatory or someone whose cross is heavier than your own. Be the microcosm of the communion of faithful saints. 

Mary of the Amazon | NOT Pachamama (update included)

Here is a link to the most recent article from the Where Peter Is blog regarding the controversial statue of Our Lady of the Amazon: https://wherepeteris.com/our-lady-of-the-amazon-a-rorschach-test/.  Here is another good article I found this morning, from The Tablet: https://www.thetablet.co.uk/blogs/1/1313/the-dishonest-cruelty-of-the-thief-who-drowned-our-lady-of-the-amazon. These two, along with the other articles on the topic at Where Peter Is, provide most of the information and reflections that I would share. I have just a few things to add.

Here is part of my comment on the first linked post:

"With respect to the bowing, the thing is that we don’t really know the context. The bowing may have been simply part of the ceremony. It could have been a prayer to God. It could have been an acknowledgement of the gifts of the Earth, a simple sign of thanksgiving (which ultimately goes to God as the Earth’s Creator). It could have been in veneration to Mary. When I pray before a statue of Mary, I bow my head. I don’t think that’s idolatry. It’s a common Catholic practice. As far as the Vatican spokesmen trying to be diplomatic, if it’s true, it doesn’t make sense. The statue could in fact be both a symbol of Amazonian life, and an image of Our Lady of the Amazon. Mary is, after all, Mother of the New Creation. She is the New Eve. She is the highest, most pure example of motherhood and womanhood. This wouldn’t even be syncretism, in my view. It could be a perfectly orthodox Catholic way of understanding the meaning of the statue. Pope Francis blessed the statue, with the knowledge that it was intended to be Our Lady of the Amazon. And I think that’s how it should be received by all of us. This, to me, is the most charitable, accurate interpretation. That a Vatican spokesperson could be ignorant of the intentions because he hasn’t taken the time to ask the woman who lead the tree planting ceremony herself, is very unfortunate. It gives fuel to the hyper conservatives to continue to insist on the Pachamama theory, which there is no evidence for. I feel at peace with the ceremony and the Marian interpretation, as well as the idea of it also being a symbol of the abundance of the Earth and Amazonian life."

The both/and perspective is a distinctive feature of the Catholic Faith, which I emphasized above. The carved wooden statue of an Amazonian pregnant woman, kneeling and bowing in prayer, was called Our Lady of the Amazon by the woman presiding at the event herself. There is video evidence of this. That fact is not in dispute. I find it extremely hard to believe that Francis would have blessed the statue if it were a pagan idol. There is further video evidence for the statue being the Blessed Mother Mary from REPAM in 2018, which you can watch, with a translation of the Spanish Christmas song, at Where Peter Is: https://wherepeteris.com/our-lady-of-the-amazon-2018-video-footage-emerges/. In addition, there is testimony from a priest who was involved in the organization of the tree planting ceremony who confirmed it being Mary, and I think his statement backs up my both/and take on the matter. 

No one involved with the Amazon Synod ever called the statue Pachamama. That was the invention of someone's imagination. If you do a Google search of Pachamama images, there are dozens of variations. None of them look like the statue. As a goddess revered by the Incas of the Andes, she is often portrayed as having a mountain for her body. I'm not even sure that she's a deity of the Amazonian region under discussion at the Synod. Yet mere speculation is given as proof of paganism and idol worship by the Synod's detractors.

Some people, conceding that the statue could be Mary, object to its nudity. They believe that portraying Mary nude is disrespectful to her. But there is a difference between an objective, moral wrong and something that makes one subjectively feel uncomfortable. 

I remember feeling surprised and slightly uncomfortable myself when I discovered classical Catholic paintings of Our Lady with an exposed breast. She is the Virgin of the Milk. 

This type of painting is a much more true-to-life, elaborate representation than the primitive wooden statue. It would be hypocritical to complain about the statue's nudity while thinking the European paintings are perfectly acceptable. In fact, it could be taken as bigotry and racism against the Amazonian peoples and their culture. That is exactly how some are interpreting the theft of the statues from the church in Rome which were then dumped by the thieves into the river. If those men really believed what they were doing was devout and righteous, why hide their faces? Why not proudly come forward if they have committed no crime? Why not allow themselves to be martyred if they are charged with stealing? 

How sad and discouraged the Catholic Amazonians must be who came to Rome full of hope and goodwill. That's why I feel compelled to be a positive voice amongst the cacophony of hatred and hysteria expressed in some segments of the Catholic media. I converted to Catholicism with the understanding that I would humble myself before the authority of the Pope and the Church, which is the authority of Christ himself. This is not blind obedience. It's called faith. 

Update: Pope Francis made a public statement after the stolen statues were retrieved.

“Good afternoon. I want to say a word about the statues of the pachamama that were taken from the church of the Transpontina – which were there without idolatrous intentions – and were thrown into the Tiber.

First of all, this happened in Rome, and, as Bishop of the Diocese, I ask pardon of the persons who were offended by this act.

Then, I want to communicate to you that the statues which created such attention in the media, were retrieved from the Tiber. The statues were not damaged.”  

The pope's use of the word "pachamama" was then clarified:

“In his remarks, the pope used the phrase 'the pachamama statues' but in the transcript the word pachamama was in italics.

Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said the pope used the word as a means to identify the statues because that is the way they have become known in the Italian media and not as a reference to the goddess.” 

I would point out also that pachamama can be used generally to simply mean "mother earth," as that is the literal translation of the word, and this would be consistent with certain comments by Vatican spokespersons. Interestingly, Pope Francis has a book coming out titled, Our Mother Earth. The final document for the Amazon Synod has yet to be released. So between these two publications, more controversy is sure to come. But for those of us who keep the Faith, we shall inherit true joy.

Hyper Conservatives & Rad Trads | In Search of Catholicism's Middle Path

Oh Lord, my heart is not lifted up, my eyes are not raised too high; I do not occupy myself with things too great and too marvelous for me. But I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a child quieted at its mother's breast; like a child that is quieted is my soul. 
(Psalm 131: 1-2, RSV-2CE)

For now, the only commentary I'm following about what's going on in the Catholic Church, and especially regarding the Amazon Synod, is the Where Peter Is blog (wherepeteris.com), and Bishop Barron's YouTube channel. Taylor Marshall is still going on about the carved wooden statue of Our Lady of the Amazon being the pagan goddess Pachamama, Michael Voris is still sewing despair, and I can't listen to the disharmonic voices anymore. I want the quiet soul of the song of King David. 

It seems that certain vocal members of the Church, once representing a centrist, conservative element, are becoming increasingly hyper conservative, taking a hard right toward the "rad trad" position. While stopping short of saying that Vatican II, Pope Francis, and the Ordinary Form of the Mass are invalid, some traditional Catholics nevertheless come across as wanting to erase the teachings and changes of the Council; and to shed doubt on the conclave that elected Francis as Benedict XVI's successor.  

I'm not a theologian, and I don't think you have to be one in order to live as a faithful Catholic. Sometimes we strive to comprehend things that are perhaps a bit beyond us. We lean too much on our own understanding, and we forget that we will know what we need to know in God's time.  During a period of confusion and uncertainty, it's beneficial to go back to the basics. Focus on prayer, Scripture, and the Fathers of the early Church. 

This ressourcement, or a "return to the sources," is what the late Cardinal Henri de Lubac and his Communio school sought to accomplish in the aftermath of Vatican II. Faced on the one hand by a small number of bishops who wanted to reject the council, and on the other hand with a larger, too liberal faction, the Communio bishops persevered in a conservative but not regressive "middle path". This is the path continued on by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI, which we see Pope Francis developing in his unique way. 

Believing that Francis is actually working more along the excessively liberal lines represented by Karl Rahner, hyper conservative Catholics likewise lump Henri de Lubac into the category of heretics. Their solution to every ill of the Church is a return to the pre-conciliar traditionalism represented by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, which means jettisoning most of Vatican II and reverting, across the universal Church, to the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar disciplines that go with it; ie., no female altar servers, receiving Communion on the tongue only, the predominance of the Latin language, no Eucharistic ministers, etc...

If there's one thing history teaches us, it's that we can't turn back the clock. As Catholics, we must hold to the traditions, both oral and written, left to us by Jesus and his Apostles. This is biblical. It's also a matter of Scripture and oral Tradition that we would see a development of doctrine over time. And that Jesus left us his Church as the ultimate pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Timothy 3: 15). Where Peter (the pope) is, there is the Church. This is what I cling to in these difficult times. 

So my next step is to read some of the works of Henri de Lubac and prayerfully discern the orthodoxy of his theology. I will follow his lead in returning to the sources as a way of putting the history of the Church in its entirely into perspective. I'll cease hurting my brain with those current arguments "too great and too marvelous for me." I'll keep following St. Therese's little way and the humble wisdom of the Holy Father. 

There are some testimonies that may prove helpful and inspiring, but that we are not meant to copy, for that coud even lead us astray from the one specific path that the Lord has in mind for us. The important thing is that each believer discern his or her own path, that they bring out the very best of themselves, the most personal gifts that God has placed in their hearts (cf. 1 Cor 12:7), rather than hopelessly trying to imitate something not meant for them. 
-- Pope Francis, Gaudete et Exsultate   

Is Pope Francis Off the Rails? | The "Bad Things Happen in 3s" Rule | The Antidote of Traditional Catholicism

Now we know that for those who love God all things work together unto good, for those who, according to his purpose, are saints through his call.    Romans 8: 28


When the sex abuse scandal erupted in the Catholic Church during last year's "summer of shame," I wondered how God would work this horror to the good. Like many Catholics, I've experienced confusion, anger, doubt, and despondency. Pope Francis didn't exactly provide the answers his flock were craving. He still hasn't. 

To Archbishop Vigano's accusations that the sex crimes of U.S. Cardinal McCarrick were known at the highest levels of the Vatican, that Pope Benedict had in fact put severe restrictions on McCarrick, which Pope Francis subsequently lifted; Francis merely stated, "I will not say a single word" on the allegations of cover-up. 

McCarrick has since been defrocked, and the pope eventually claimed that he didn't know about McCarrick, or at least didn't remember being told. He held a meeting of bishops this year in February to deal with the problem of pedophilia in the Church, extending the mission to eradicate crimes of pedophilia worldwide. However, the McCarrick earthquake was only the beginning of a series of aftershocks that have continued to be revealed over the past year. The corruption in the Church goes higher and is more extensive than anyone imagined. 

As admirable as Pope Francis' efforts toward addressing the issue of pedophilia are, many were concerned that he needed to clean up his own house before setting out to rid the world of this scourge. And truth be told, pedophilia is not actually the primary issue. Even one case of sex abuse against a child is too many. But as it turns out, 81% of the sex abuse cases perpetrated by Catholic clergy over a period of many decades did not involve children or females at all. Pedophilia as legally defined is a crime against pre-pubescent children. Catholic clergy are no more likely to be guilty of pedophilia than clergy of non-Catholic Christian denominations or other faith traditions. 

The fact that 81% of these cases involved adolescent boys and grown men clearly makes this a situation of gross homosexual predation. Homosexual attacks and intimidation perpetrated upon seminarians and a homosexual grooming of the priesthood have been exposed. The Church is blighted with a systemic disorder, and the hierarchy seems unwilling to address it. Only when the secular media exposes abuse against a minor does the Vatican take action. 

So in a nutshell, there's the first bad thing in the proverbial series of three. The Body of Christ had not even recovered from the shock of the sex abuse scandal before we were hit with the next blow. The upcoming Synod of Bishops for the Pan-Amazon Region will meet from Oct. 6 to 27. A significant amount of attention has shifted from the sex abuse crisis to outrage against the agenda of this meeting, which traditional Catholics fear could destroy the Church and her perennial teachings as we know them. The working document of the Pan-Amazon Synod (Instrumentum Laboris), from the portions I've heard via Catholic news outlets, seems like an ode to paganism and the New Age, with phrases like God Father-Mother Creator and the Cosmic Christ (http://www.sinodoamazonico.va/content/sinodoamazonico/en/documents/pan-amazon-synod--the-working-document-for-the-synod-of-bishops.html).

I haven't read the entire document yet, but this is the kind of language I heard when I attended the "New Thought" Unity Church, which did not even have a valid Christian baptism, baptizing in the Holy Spirit only. Its book shop and library were filled with New Age offerings such as Neal Donald Walsh's "channeled" series, Conversations with God, and Eastern teachings, including reincarnation. This is also, I don't think coincidentally, the language used in A Course in Miracles, the "channeled" New Age tome upon which Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson's beliefs are built. 

The fear being expressed by some members of the clergy and laity alike is that there is nothing Catholic about these "new paths" of the Amazon Synod. I see a parallel between the fight for the soul of the Church and the fight for the preservation of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness we are witnessing in the United States of America. 

The good news is that the sex abuse scandal brought intense scrutiny on Pope Francis, so that he isn't going to be able to slip by under the radar with this Amazonian agenda, like he did with his 2016 papal document, Amoris Laetitia. Though the orthodoxy of its content was being seriously questioned, Catholic news media outlets such as EWTN tried to interpret that document with a hermeneutic of continuity, giving the pope the benefit of the doubt that he was not intent on breaking with Tradition. However, some now believe that Amoris Laetitia was intended to set the stage for the impending October Synod. More and more of the faithful are seriously concerned that the Church is indeed in dire straits. 

Oh, but that isn't all, my friends. Come May 14, 2020, we will be faced with determining the meaning of Pope Francis' "new humanism" agenda, with a meeting titled "Reinventing the Global Educational Alliance." From what I've heard, Pope Francis has  already indicated that Catholics must fall in line with the socialist ideology of the United Nations, and this Global Education Pact might just seal the deal. Wait, doesn't the Catholic Church teach that parents are to be respected as the primary and principle educators of their children? Indeed she does. So why does it seem that the pope wants the "global village" to raise our children? 

If the saying is true that bad things happen in 3s, there you have it: 1) the scourge of homosexual predators that has infiltrated the Church;
2) The ambiguous agenda of the Pan-Amazon Synod which some believe aims to destroy traditional Church teaching and replace it with paganism and New Age mumbo jumbo;
3) The Global Education Pact to seal the deal by taking possession of the upbringing of our children.

Unfortunately, I've become so disturbed and distracted by all of this that I've become less diligent in doing those very things that are directly in my control as a response to any and all worries; such as praying the Rosary, going to Mass whenever possible, going to Confession, and fasting. We especially need to pray for Pope Francis. His intentions might be good and pastoral, but misguided. Perhaps certain men that wish to influence him do not have the best interests of the Church at heart. 

I recently learned that Francis is the first post-Vatican II pope. In other words, he received his priestly formation after the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965. At this point in history the infiltration of unorthodox ideas that had been brewing for some time broke the surface, and much chaos and confusion in the Church ensued. The '70s and '80s are famous as an era of poor catechesis and a watering down of the Faith. Yet Francis remains the Vicar of Christ, and we must respect his holy office.

Jesus said, "And I say to thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 6: 18). Herein lies our hope. I converted to Catholicism because I came to believe that this Church is the one, holy, catholic (meaning universal) and apostolic Church built by Christ himself. I have seen the Lord work in not only mysterious ways, but with methods that seem downright bizarre. 

I don't know how he's going to work these bad things to his purposes, for the good of those who love God and answer the call to be his saints, but I have faith that he will do it. Our Lady also promised at Fatima that her Immaculate Heart will triumph. Satan will not prevail in the end, but we need to gear up for one hell of a battle.

Numbers 2 and 3 in my list of Bad Things have not yet transpired. There is still time to turn the tide. This is what I'll be exploring further in upcoming posts. To the men, I implore you to suit up, grab your lance, and mount the horse. You are the head of your family as Christ is the head of his Church. You MUST lead the way out of this quagmire. This means that you will need to reclaim traditional Christian manhood. 

Likewise, we women need to clean the dust off the men's armor and let them wear it. Allow them to sharpen the lance. Encourage them to ride the steed. We MUST reject feminism and reclaim traditional Christian womanhood. The connection may not seem clear, but I promise to elucidate the pattern of dots. The antidote to the infection is to cling ever more diligently to the cross and the true Tradition of the Church.

It's about the principle of subsidiarity, people. We have to begin with our own homes and communities before we can affect a wider change. And this isn't just for Catholics. Only today I read that the United Methodist Church is going into an official schism over the LGBT issue. That church will no longer be able to call itself United. The Catholic Church is the last bastion of traditional Christian teaching. She's the largest, most influential church in the world, and if she falls too far into darkness, the rest of Christendom will likewise plummet. 

The symptoms of heresy, apostasy, and immorality touch all Christians. We have to put our differences aside, not to pretend that they don't matter, because they do; but we need each other to have a hope for the future of our country and our children, wherever in the world we might live. God only works together for our good if we are saints, so it's imperative that we unite as such.

I will be speaking most directly to Catholics in many instances, when I explore what actions we might take and what attitudes we can adopt as saints, but I think that many other Christians will be able to relate. Let's build a community to restore the Church right here at Organic Mothering. Are you in?

(P.S. Please see my follow up to this post, the article dated Oct. 12.  More recent information is included, and developments have led to my reconsidering some of the views brought out in this post. I'm now questioning the narrative pervasively being put forth by certain members of the conservative Catholic news media and commentary.)

Restoring the Catholic Church: Dr. Marshall's Infiltration, Receiving on the Tongue, and Veiling

Infiltration: The Plot to Destroy the Catholic Church from Within, by Dr. Taylor Marshall, will be released May 31. I've been following Dr. Marshall's YouTube show, "TnT," co-hosted with Timothy Gordon. These guys shoot straight from the hip about all-the-things surrounding the ongoing crisis in the Church. The goal of this book is to provide an explanation for what and who led to the events and revelations related to the 2018 "summer of shame." Last summer exposed for the world a systemic sex abuse scandal involving the highest levels of Church hierarchy and reaching back many decades. 

How can the laity help to heal and restore the Body of Christ? I'm awaiting Dr. Marshall's recommendations, but I've already begun to implement small steps of my own. Many Catholics have been calling for a return to tradition for some time, especially in the liturgy of the Mass. Some are fortunate to have regular access to the Tridentine Mass, or Traditional Latin Mass, and have been spiritually edified by what they feel is a more reverent worship of God. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI re-instituted this pre-Vatican II form of the Mass while he was still the acting pope. He asked that the faithful refer to this as the Extraordinary Form. (The 2nd Vatican Council was held from 1962-1965.)

The Ordinary Form of the Mass, instituted after Vatican II, is the one most available across the world and is spoken in the vernacular languages. It's often referred to as the Novus Ordo. Unfortunately, division has been created by liturgical abuses in the Ordinary Form and by those who prefer one form over the other, with very vocal protests. I won't go into the reasons for the debate here, but you can read all about it on the Internet. Do be aware that there's a lot of misinformation out there. 

One approach to bridging the gap is to return, even if only on an individual basis, to more traditional practices in both worship during the Mass and in private devotions. Near to where I live, the Extraordinary Form is only available once a month, at a parish in an adjoining county. I've been to it a couple of times, but my family has always attended the Ordinary Form otherwise. Even with a guide to follow the Latin with English translations, I was honestly lost during the Tridentine Mass. I plan to go again soon so I can make a better evaluation of the differences between the two forms.

Last Sunday I began to receive the Eucharist on the tongue rather than in the hand, and to make sure that I'm in line to receive from either the priest or deacon, rather than from lay persons (known as Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, who can only distribute the Eucharist in the Ordinary Form). In the Tridentine Mass, the Eucharist can only be received on the tongue and is distributed exclusively by a priest or deacon. Here, only the host (the bread) is available. Both the bread and wine can be received at the Novus Ordo.

I felt a profound difference immediately from receiving the consecrated bread on the tongue. I'd been feeling awkward and uncomfortable receiving in the hand and from a lay person. These practices are allowed in the U.S. and do not desecrate the Eucharist, which Catholics believe is the Real Presence of Jesus, body, blood, soul, and divinity, in the transubstantiated bread and wine. In order to receive the consecrated wine, doing so from a lay person is unavoidable at the parishes I attend, but it's fine to receive the host alone. And since the wine is in a chalice and isn't directly touched by the Extraordinary Ministers, I'm more comfortable with it. 


Today I wore a head scarf, in the tradition of women veiling, a practice which goes back to the early Church and is a biblical exhortation.  The Church no longer requires women to veil at the Mass, but from what I understand, this was never officially stated. Rather, the requirement was only omitted from an update to Canon Law at some point following Vatican II. My feeling is that women can have a profound impact in their parishes by taking up this devotion in humility to Christ and as role models for the restoration of tradition. I have veiled at other times, and once it brought such great joy to a man who had grown up with women veiling at church. He said to my husband, "You must be so proud of her!" I feel an internal shift toward piety when I wear a head covering at Mass, and I don't think I'll be able to go without it anymore. 

In so many ways our modern society is faltering, failing, and sinking into the abyss as a result of the loss and intentional rejection of traditional values. As the rot in the hierarchy is rooted out, we can return to the roots of our Faith. The solution is not to leave the Church. I converted to Catholicism because I came to believe that this is the one Church founded by Jesus on the rock he named Peter. I believe that in this Church, full of snakes and sinners, the fullest expression of Christian Truth can be found. I believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, and I will not be deprived of this spiritual nourishment. Don't let Satan win. Fight in your own little way, until the light you shine becomes irrepressible. 

My goal for this summer is to continue to implement ideas for the restoration of tradition in Catholic worship and with my family in the domestic church, and to create a picture for you of how all this fits with the virtue of simplicity. Please share your own ideas and practices in the comments!

St. Rita of Cascia, patroness of Impossible Causes, pray for us!

Rethinking the "Daniel Fast" and Refocusing on Lent

I am rethinking the "Daniel Fast." In trying to figure out how I would eat, poring over the recipes, and wondering if I'd be able to cook for my family since my previous post, anxiety set in. 
Anxiety is not a fruit of the Holy Spirit.

I liked the idea of giving up everything--sugar, processed foods, caffeine, alcohol, and dairy. (All meat, including poultry and fish, is also prohibited, but I'm a vegetarian, so that wasn't an issue for me.) But it's even stricter than that. Only whole grains are allowed (no white flour), and only flat breads. No yeast or fermented products. No beverages but water. Not even unsweetened fruit juices. 

Some of the recipes in Kristen Feola's The Ultimate Guide to the Daniel Fast are very labor intensive. Many of the ingredients, such as strawberries and zucchini, aren't readily available. Even so, I could probably do it just for myself, but I don't think I could feed my family this way. Also, the "fast" does not emphasize organic, locally grown, and in season foods, so it isn't taking into consideration the poor nutrition content, chemical pesticides, and GMOs that may reside in the plants--which would certainly not be aligned with following the biblical approach to food that's implied.

When I told my husband that I was going to modify the "fasting" guidelines, he asked, "Then why bother to do it?"  "For God," I replied. And here is the crux of the matter. My whole reason for doing the "Daniel Fast" was to make it a part of my Lenten observance (and to follow the leading I feel toward a vegan diet). The purpose of Lent is to prepare oneself for Easter, the greatest feast in the liturgical year. This truth was getting lost in the shuffle. I'm finding that I need to refocus my efforts on putting my Catholic Faith first. 

During Lent we seek to weed out those things that distract us from God. Lent is a time of penance, and the faithful are encouraged to give up something. Typically this may include a favorite food, such as chocolate; a substance one is addicted to, such as cigarettes or caffeine; a sinful behavior; or media, such as Facebook. We deny ourselves something from which it is difficult to abstain, so that we may rely more completely on the Lord. 

The 40 days of Lent are in imitation of Jesus' 40 days of fasting and prayer in the desert. In a true biblical fast, he took no food or drink. No doubt such a fast requires extreme supernatural assistance. Most people would die. The Church does not ask such extremes of us. We have two days of fasting during Lent--Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. 

By the Church's definition, a fast in this instance means eating no more than two small meals and one larger meal, which is not bigger than the two smaller meals together. No snacking in between. I believe that the only beverage allowed is water on those fasting days, and no meat is allowed on Ash Wednesday and all the Fridays of Lent. Fish is not considered meat and is permitted. 

Lent is also a time for concentrating on charity. We can give more to the poor and needy from the funds we save by fasting and abstinence, and more of our time is available via reducing our distractions. The "Daniel Fast" has become a huge distraction for me even before Lent has begun! 

I think that in my case, completely giving up caffeine, dairy, and wine (the only alcohol I drink) will be more than plenty. In addition, my family will be cutting out junky sweets and reducing added sugars and processed foods (we don't eat much that is highly processed anyway), as much as is reasonably possible. The sweets we do use will be sparing and natural--organic cane sugar, local honey and maple syrup, and agave nectar. We already eat mostly whole grains, except for pasta, which just doesn't taste good to us. However, we do buy organic pastas. I will probably try the unleavened bread recipe in the book, but I'm not going to follow the ordinance against yeast. 

I've asked my husband not to bring anymore candy, ice cream, or sugary cereals into the house for Lent. Our teenage daughter is not happy about this at all. But I think it's really important for her not to expect to have daily doses of chocolate cereal (even if it is organic!), ice cream, and candy. 

In a nutshell, I want to obtain a good balance this Lent, and I want most of my food observances to be a permanent way of eating. I will likely have a little chocolate now and then after Lent, and the occasional glass of wine at dinner, as I currently do. I want to drastically reduce my cravings for highly sweet foods. My hope is to continue abstaining from dairy, ultimately for the whole family-- though an occasional cheese pizza might be necessary for family harmony! As for the caffeine, I don't want coffee or tea to be a daily thing anymore, but if I have days where I need a little to get by, I might occasionally indulge after Lent. 

I think the most important thing is to prayerfully consider what God is calling each of us to do--and not to do--during Lent. The basic focus on prayer, fasting, penance, and charity is common to all, but the details will vary for each of us. The "Daniel Fast" sounded like an answer to my prayers, but we must always test the spirits. For one thing, I was too focused on the end goal of losing weight. I suppose one could "give up" ten pounds for Lent, but weight loss is not what Lent is about. The "Daniel Fast" is a spiritual practice and is not designed for weight loss either, but that element simply became too important to me.

It also doesn't appear that the "Daniel Fast" is even a biblical fast, which is why I've been putting it in quotes throughout this article. It's based upon the first chapter of the book of Daniel and chapter 10, verses two and three. In neither case do we find the word, fast. In the first chapter, a 10-day food test is described, and in chapter 10, a 21-day period of mourning is recounted. In both cases, we can only speculate of what Daniel's diet specifically consisted. 

In chapter 1, he eats only "vegetables" and drinks only water. Some scholars believe that "vegetables" refer also to fruits and whole grains. At any rate, this seems to be Daniel's regular diet. There is no period of fasting indicated here. And while one might fast during a time of mourning, one can fast without mourning, and one can mourn without fasting. 

Daniel does specifically fast in chapter nine: "I turned to the Lord God, pleading in earnest prayer, with fasting, sackcloth, and ashes. I prayed to the Lord, my God, and confessed... We have sinned..." (verses 3-5).  So we see that there is a difference drawn between biblical fasting (traditionally going with no food or drink or consuming only water), and the other two cases of dietary restrictions on which the "Daniel Fast" is based.

The "Daniel Fast" guidelines seem somewhat arbitrary as well. Bible translations vary, making it even more difficult to discern exactly what Daniel was eating. In chapter 10 of my 1963 Confraternity Version of the Holy Bible, it reads: "I ate no savory food, I took no meat or wine..."  Savory means "pleasant to the sense of taste esp. by reason of effective seasoning" (ninth collegiate Merriam-Webster). (Notice also that during this time of mourning, Daniel did not anoint himself--did not groom/clean his body--for the duration of the three weeks. Yet this practice forms no part of the so-called fast!)

In the "Daniel Fast", according to Kristin Feola's book, you can use "date honey" made by boiling dates down to a sauce, but you can't use natural sweeteners like honey from bees or maple syrup. Why is this? You can use salt, herbs, and spices, which surely fall under the category of savory. Recipes in the book using date honey, cinnamon, and various herbs and spices, such as oatmeal raisin cookies and corn muffins, definitely have a savory quality. And why are herbs allowed, but not herbal teas?

My concern is that this Daniel diet is being billed as a biblical fast, which it is not, and being marketed as a specifically Christian practice. (Mega-church pastor Rick Warren's book, The Daniel Plan, has apparently sprung from the original idea. He and his co-authors all have dangerous, New Age associations, but that's a whole other can of worms!) 

The "Daniel Fast" was created by Susan Gregory, who bemoans that her plan has been hijacked (http://daniel-fast.com/hijacked/); and it appears that she has grounds for being upset. Though her intentions seem good, I'm concerned about her premise: 

'I started teaching Christians about the Daniel Fast in 2007. If you’ve read my book, The Daniel Fast: feed your soul, strengthen your spirit and renew your body, then you know that this all came about when I received a word from the Lord to “write about the Daniel Fast.” And my greatest desire is to support and guide men, women and teens so they can have a successful fasting experience.'

I don't doubt that some people benefit from following this plan. Yet if Susan's guidelines are not in reality based upon the biblical fasting of Daniel, if the idea is confused in the first place, as I've illustrated, then we should be wary of believing that it came from God. (Kristen Feola, likewise, believes that God inspired her to use her recipes in service of this plan.) 

The "Daniel Fast" appears to have become trendy, with many churches and individuals jumping on the bandwagon for various reasons. I think it will eventually fade and give way to the next, new thing. It has the potential to become a magical formula, and an idol. In and of itself, I don't think following this diet is harmful, but it does not constitute a biblically-based fast, and I would tread this path with care.

So, Catholics and other Christians, whether you practice Lent or not, do not feel obligated to follow this "Daniel Fast", at all or exactly as prescribed. It can certainly serve as an inspiration to make healthier choices and to treat one's body as the temple of the Holy Spirit that it is. The main benefit I'll take from the book is in using some of the recipes to help me with the transition to a vegan diet, which is a topic for another post. 

If you do practice Lent, follow the Catholic Church's guidelines and take advantage of her other spiritual offerings this season, and seek the Lord in prayer. Remember, on Ash Wednesday we are admonished to turn away from sin. The ashes rubbed on our foreheads remind us that from dust we come, and to dust we shall return. Don't be distracted by an overly scrupulous "fast" designed by man, not God. May the grace of the Spirit be yours this Lenten season. 

Authenticity.

Take heed and guard yourselves from all covetousness, for a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.  Luke 12:15

It seems to me that the simplicity/slow/minimalism movement is at its heart about authenticity. Life in modern society is focused upon trying to be like other people--mostly people we don't know, people we see in magazines, on social media and television. Or if we do sort of know them, we want to be like the versions of themselves that they want other people to see and believe. Why do we do this, grasshoppers?

We don't know ourselves, so we think we need other people to help us figure out what we like and don't like, what our true style is, what our secret purpose is in life. We create fantasy selves.

If I don't orient my life around who I am in the eyes of God, then I truly don't know who I am. I'm not rooted, and I float around willy-nilly. I have to intentionally spend time, daily, in prayer, reading the Bible, and contemplation. I also have to spend time regularly in creation, going outside, noticing the birds, insects, and flowers, being active.

I have to see myself as a child of God and of Mary, as a sister of Jesus. As a member of the mystical body of Christ, which is the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I have to make a concerted effort to see all others as made in the image and likeness of God. And if I miss Mass for whatever reason, things begin to fall apart.

When we declutter and pare down our possessions; when we eat local, organic food and keep a compost heap in our yards; when we strictly limit the time we spend plugged into devices; when we walk in the woods, have dinner together as a family, and stop making an idol of busyness, we become authentic. When we stop focusing on ourselves and tend to the needs of others, we become more of who we were meant to be.

We must stop wanting what other people have. We must quit trying to be like other people, or who other people think we are or should be. We have to recognize the addiction to possessions, and in a sense, to value things more than we do. A true materialism values quality over quantity and is content with having enough. Our society teaches us to see things as disposable and easily replaceable. This attitude then gets extended to people. It's imperative that we learn to appreciate what we have and be good stewards of our possessions; and to treat all people and creatures with kindness and dignity.

Searching for your "authentic Self" is a bit narcissistic, isn't it? Authenticity isn't self-conscious, and it doesn't need constant entertainment and novelty. Go deeper with what you have. Get outside of yourself and serve others. Lose yourself, and all the baggage, to find yourself. Rejoice and be glad.

Project, Simply Catholic Homeschooling (and the Latin Question)

Happy June! What glorious weather we are having!! I am now the mother of a teenager, and we are about to host a big birthday slumber party. Our public pool will open next week, and it will be time to just relax and sink into summer. I have even already delivered my homeschooling paperwork to the local school superintendent's office!

I'm happy to say that my decluttering project, which I focused upon during Lent, is still in action. My terrible bedroom annex is finally presentable. It isn't finished yet, but it's no longer embarrassing. My daughter's bedroom is also slowly but surely being relieved of its burdens of stuff.

In addition to that project, and in relation to it, I'm going to apply the concept of schole, learning as leisure, to myself. I'm going to solve the mystery of what Catholic home education actually is! Here's the thing. When I first started homeschooling, I often came across the assurance that parents know their children better than anyone and are the most qualified people to teach them. And this, regardless of educational background. We could teach our children well without any type of certificate, training, or degree. I rarely see these sentiments being expressed anymore.

Instead, it's all about which is the best method or curriculum program, and whether or not you can--or must--do this or that as a Catholic (or an unschooler, or a classical or Charlotte Mason homeschooler, etc...). There is a potent sense of insecurity in the atmosphere. There is also much argument over what increasingly seems to me to be much ado about nothing. We have forgotten that we are not teaching curriculum programs--we're teaching children. Our children. Who we know better than anyone else. Remember?!

It seems to me that Catholic homeschoolers are, by and large, putting teaching methods and gurus before the Faith. Perhaps I'm wrong, and I hope that I am. The most pertinent question on our minds should be this: What does the Church teach us about education? What do the Bible, the popes, and the saints have to tell us? What particular guidance is being given us by the Holy Spirit? Do we even have the eyes to see and the ears to hear? Or are we too caught up in philosophical anxiety?

I'll tell you what. Let's get the Latin thing out of the way right now, and at least one problem will be solved. Yes, Latin plays a substantial role in the tradition of the Catholic Church. Yes, a curriculum centered around the Latin and Greek languages, literature, and history might be the most authentically classical one. And yes, studying inflected languages does help better one's understanding of English grammar; and yes, by all accounts Latin helps to develop critical thinking skills. But no, you don't have to study Latin to be a Catholic homeschooler. You don't have to re-create the Jesuit system of classical education in your home to be an authentically Catholic educator.

French and Spanish are both inflected languages, and there are others. You aren't obligated, however, to teach any foreign language to your child. He will need a certain number of years of foreign language study in high school if he's college bound. Before then, it doesn't have to be an issue. It's entirely up to you!

As far as critical thinking skills go, Latin is not the only way to get them. For me personally, Shakespeare was the ticket! Reading the Bard, forming a thesis, and proving it with the text at hand and within the historical context was the process that developed my ability to think for myself, and to back up my opinion with substantial evidence. This is what honed my writing skills in college. At any rate, I dare say that Jesus Christ excelled at critical thinking and rhetorical skills, without the benefit of Latin.

But is Latin worthy of studying? Of course it is! It can be a wonderful way of passing on the cultural heritage of Western civilization, and I have a library book all ready to teach me over the summer. We are raising our children to be lifelong learners, yes? If we do not get to Latin while they are under our roofs, they will have the opportunity to pursue it on their own at a later time. 

I feel like my critical thinking skills have been enhanced simply by becoming Catholic. The very process of learning the Catholic Faith itself has formed new pathways in my brain, to be sure! Along the journey, it occurred to me that Catholicism is very logical. As I've mentioned, a key figure in Catholic theology, philosophy, and education is St. Thomas Aquinas and his Scholastic Method of the 13th century, by which he successfully united faith with reason. It's becoming ever more clear why the Faith is at once both extremely rational and deeply mystical.

I finished reading Guide to Thomas Aquinas by Joseph Pieper and have a couple of other books going on the scholastics of the Middle Ages, which in fact include not only Christians, but Jewish and Muslim thinkers as well! I've printed off Pope Pius XI's encyclical, Divini Illius Magistri (On the Christian Education of Youth), and I've started reading Catholic Home Schooling by Mary Kay Clark.

I want to know what Catholic education is, pure and simple. And I do think it is much simpler than the mountains of methods that we've been forcing ourselves to climb.

May Meanderings

I was up at 6:30 this morning, unusually early, probably in anticipation of attending my first homeschooling conference later today! I will be driving an hour to a city where such things occur. It isn't a Charlotte Mason conference; there hasn't been one of those close to my home. But I'm excited because it is being held by a Catholic company, Seton Home Study. As Charlotte Mason herself was not Catholic, it can be especially difficult for Catholic CM home educators to find good materials to suit our needs. In some ways I think we really are pioneers.

For all CM homeschoolers, the challenge exists to find living books for the self-design of a curriculum. There are full curriculum guides online, but not all are Catholic, and for various reasons it may not work to follow a single one completely. Cost of books can certainly be an issue. In the spirit of thriftiness I enjoy finding vintage treasures at flea markets, garage sales, antiques shops, and library book sales. And of course a great deal can be found through the library system itself.

I like Seton because they provide resources such as reprints of vintage Catholic readers and the Baltimore Catechism, and they incorporate historical fiction novels. When I wasn't getting very far teaching Beezy cursive writing, I ordered one of their handwriting workbooks, and it has been very effective. Today I'm going to take a look at their Bible history offerings for 6th and 7th grade. Though their curriculum is heavy on traditional text/workbooks, these often use a story format rather than the typical dry facts variety. It will also simply be nice to have a mom's day out, to listen to the speakers at the conference and experience being a part of a larger homeschooling community. Where I live there are very few Catholic homeschooling families.

It is wonderful to be able to sit out on my front porch this morning, enjoying the sunshine and birdsong. One of my favorite delights every year is getting the porch all cleaned up and reorganized. We can eat, visit with friends and family, and do our school lessons out here. I've been watching children trickle to the bus stop, and that brings me to another topic.

Last week Beezy had the opportunity to attend full days at the Catholic school where she takes a la carte art and gym classes. She was supposed to go full-time all week, but by Wednesday night she had a sore throat, so she only went for three days. That was enough of the experiment to gauge what it would really be like.

As I suspected, if we sent Beezy there full time, our family life would revolve almost entirely around school. Beezy did enjoy it. She didn't seem to mind getting up early, and she wasn't bored being there all day. What she did not enjoy was the homework, especially for math. From what I saw with all of the homework, she is working at grade level, so I don't think a transition to school life would be a problem in that respect. But a good portion of the evenings were spent with her dad and I helping with homework. One evening she visited with a neighbor friend for an hour. On another we took a family dog walk, and on the third she played outside for awhile. But allowing her to have a life in the evening meant not finishing the homework.

In addition, parents of Catholic school children are expected to do a lot of volunteer work. I put  the issue of the cost of tuition out of my mind in order to evaluate other kinds of costs. The biggest cost is time. I would spend a minimum of five hours every week driving to and from the school. In that amount of  time I can cover two days worth of homeschooling! Beezy didn't have time for the book she is reading for pleasure, or to watch our favorite shows on Netflix. I was not able to do our usual bedtime read alouds. If we were to add her weekly piano lesson, religious education class, and participation in a sport to the mix, I don't see how we would have any free time left. As children get older, even weekends are consumed with homework and extracurricular school activities.

The experience gave me a new appreciation for the ability to homeschool. My husband was dead set against losing this freedom and being chained to the school schedule and requirements. We only have one car, so on a day like today I would not be able to go a conference in a city an hour away. And in our current situation, other homeschooling friends who also have greater freedom with time can get together for play dates and sleepovers any day of the week. With not having to pay tuition, we can spend that money on lessons, classes, field trips, sports, and other enrichment activities that would have to otherwise go by the wayside. And we don't have to become exhausted and disconnected from one another in the process. I was amazed that after having my child at school for the entire day, I still had to "homeschool" in the evenings! I cannot see the benefit.

The Catholic school is great. It's a good place for those families who cannot homeschool. Beezy's class is a wonderful group of kids, and the Catholic environment is extremely important. I wouldn't consider public school unless it was the only option. But I can best live my vocation as a Catholic mother by homeschooling. Even at the Catholic school, the education is infiltrated with Common Core, and the only class in which Catholic school books are used is the religion class. The children pray there three times daily, and they attend Mass once a week. Most of the teachers are Catholic. At home I can provide an education in which the Catholic Faith permeates the entire curriculum, which fulfills the teaching of the Church in a way that the school does not. The sacrifice of time and money would not be worth it to me or my husband. I feel blessed that we can have the best of both worlds, that we can homeschool and also provide a part-time experience of enrichment classes at the school for our child.

We all want what is best for our children. I believe in a Charlotte Mason education. That is simply not something my daughter would be privileged to have at any of our area schools. The freedom of educational choice is one that we must not take for granted. We exercise our rights, or risk losing them. I choose to seize the day!

Is Charlotte Mason Classical?

Is Charlotte Mason classical? Type this question into a search engine, and you will have lots and lots and lots of choices of articles and blog posts to read. You will find in depth analysis and a million opinions. You will encounter academic sounding terms like "trivium" and "synthetic thinking", and all kinds of people trying to sound very smart. Is that a catty statement to make? Maybe.

But here's the thing: I don't care whether she is or she isn't. This question has created a huge debate and a perceived "division" among Charlotte Mason home educators, a gap which many are trying to close in order to maintain CM unity (or for entertainment purposes). Basically I think it's all an enormous waste of time.

Some of you may remember my meandering journey around the idea of unschooling. I'm seeing a replica of the exact same kind of confusion and argument over terms and "philosophy" again, only now it is classical education at the heart of the cyclone. Eventually I said to myself, "Self, who cares?" And I walked away from unschooling. I said my peace and acknowledged that I can't control anyone else's choices. In a strange way it felt like breaking an addiction, as if there were a supernatural pull trying to lure me back to the dark side.

People get so wrapped up in identifying themselves according to homeschooling methods, to the point that it can become an idol. Recently I've seen the trap set again, but you can't fool me twice. Just like with unschooling, "classical" means different things to different people. The definition becomes a matter of personal interpretation to the extent of nearly losing any meaning entirely, and all kinds of "experts" come out of the woodwork. When I encountered Charlotte Mason, it was through an actual book that a fellow homeschooling mother that I physically knew placed in my real life hand. I also heard about unschooling from a flesh-and-blood source. But these avalanches of debates and direly passionate opinions only seem to happen in one place. And it's right here, on the internet.

I ask you, as you move and breathe in your own home with your own husband, children, dogs and goldfish, does any of this stuff really matter to you, personally, in your day-to-day life? Or is it in reality a monumental distraction away from your everyday joys and responsibilities?

I recently read Consider This: Charlotte Mason and the Classical Tradition by Karen Glass. She is one of these "authorities". Then I came across the article, "Reconsidering Charlotte Mason and the Classical Tradition" by Art Middlekauff, another expert, refuting Glass' thesis. I lean toward Middlekauff's evaluation of things, but that's beside the point. (You can view the article at http://www.charlottemasoninstitute.org/reconsidering-charlotte-mason-and-the-classical-tradition-by-art-middlekauff/). Naturally Middlekauff's daring to defy Glass (nearly sainted in some circles) stirred a hubbub on Facebook, the ultimate bastion of time wasting, tomfoolery, and breathless emulsion of feelings...nothing more than feelings... (cue music).

But such writings and discussions are "important", right?! Both Glass' and Middlekauff's treatises are interesting, well-written, thoroughly researched, thought-provoking--and completely at odds. And oh the reactionary places we'll go! This classical dead horse is being beaten to death.

Here is what I think. We have the teachings of the Catholic Church on education; we have 6 long volumes written by Charlotte Mason herself (and other writings available from her and the PNEU); and we have Sacred Scripture. We have the Holy Spirit to guide us and teach us in all things true, good, and beautiful. Do we really need to force Charlotte Mason into the classical tradition, whatever that may mean? Do we, conversely, have to insist adamantly that she doesn't belong there at all? Can't we just let her be?

Evidently this stuff is important to some people. But I'm going to argue here and now that whether she is or isn't classical won't effect my homeschool or yours one iota. And if it doesn't, what's the point of engaging in the argument at all? It's like asking Dorothy if she's a good witch or a bad witch. Either way (and as she told us herself, she is neither), the Witch of the East has been crushed by her house, the ruby slippers are on her feet, and she's following the yellow brick road.

If you think CM is the best way to go for your family, within the brick-and-mortar walls of your domestic Church, then just get on with it. I give you permission to go directly to Charlotte yourself, where enough abundance exists for a lifetime, and shove the experts aside. Skip that whole field of poppies. The Emerald City awaits!

The "Why" of Homeschooling

When the idea of homeschooling first came up, my daughter was still a baby. My husband seemed to think it would be a good idea, but I shot it down. When he asked why I wouldn't want to homeschool, I said with vim and verve, "Because when she's five, I want my life back!"

I've told this story before, and also the part about how my mom tried to tell me, "This is your life now," but it took a long time for that truth to sink in. It wasn't that I didn't enjoy being a mother. It was simply that I was 35 years old and used to a certain freedom, and this radical new path of motherhood took some getting used to.

By the time Beezy was three, my husband and I were definitely leaning toward homeschooling. I can't for the life of me remember what caused this change of heart, but surely it was a God thing. And books by John Holt and John Taylor Gatto were influential. Despite the belief that we were following the Divine Will, I was not Catholic at the time that my child's home education began in earnest, and religion wasn't at the top of the list of reasons for this choice.

Since then I have become profoundly aware of the Church's assurance that parents have received the responsibility and solemn authority to be the primary educators of their children. Parenthood is truly a divinely decreed vocation. That does not mean that Christian parents must homeschool. But the Church says that a true education must be a Christian one, with the purpose of all study being directed toward the supreme end of getting one's children to heaven. A Catholic school could certainly be a valid choice, if it faithfully adheres to the teachings of the Church on education. Unfortunately, this is often not the case. But even if one's parish school is excellent in the realms of both religion and academics, some of the same concerns that parents have about government schools also apply here.

The secular humanism that indoctrinates children in public schools has also crept into parochial ones. The Common Core standards of the federal government that have recently been adopted by most states in the U.S. bring with them a mediocre and morally questionable curriculum that requires increased hours spent in testing and preparation for the tests. Funding is withheld from schools that do not adopt Common Core. And while it is only the subjects of math and English that are currently being hijacked, the long-term plan is to infiltrate all subjects and to establish an invasive tracking program that follows people from the cradle to the grave. I fear that Catholic schools which have adopted Common Core put their traditional aims, purpose, and freedom at risk.

There are also those intangible but crucial considerations of the well-being of the family that come into play in the question of education. Sarah MacKenzie, in her book Teaching from Rest: A Homeschooler's Guide to Unshakable Peace, explains this perspective so eloquently:

"Our children are not projects. If, by the grace of God, we can manage to remember that our children are all made in his image--and more importantly, if we can treat them as such despite the mess and the chaos--then we will really be able to teach from rest. Therein lies the reason we've taken on this arduous task of home education at all--because a government school would not see our children as the image bearers that they are. After reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, there would be no Morning Offering, no Nicene Creed. They would miss countless opportunities to love on their siblings and form deep, meaningful encounters with each other, with us, and with material chosen specifically to nurture their souls. We want all else to pale in comparison to our quest toward honor, virtue, and wisdom."

Though I have not completely ruled out the possibility of a Catholic parochial school for my child, I have serious reservations. The school day and year have grown increasingly longer over the course of American history. In addition to the standard school day plus transportation time, homework and extracurricular activities leave little space for families to spend time--of either quantity or quality--together.

Since its advent, government schooling has sought to weaken the authority of parents. Teachers and the peer group exert undue influence. One benefit of the Catholic schools is that there may be lesser issues with negative socialization, and the prevalence of a religious atmosphere is surely preferable to the obliteration of anything to do with God in the public system. 

At a Catholic school there will, or at least should be, the due support given to parents as the primary educators of their children. Yet at any school, siblings are separated from one another for long hours every day, and family bonds in general may be strained (not to mention the pocketbook in the case of private schooling!). Cacophonous bells interrupt a child's concentration and short-circuit his ability to go deeply into any course of study. Children are shuffled from one room to another, and conformity is mandatory. Problems of bullying persist, and the personality of the child is encroached upon. I am not convinced, even in the best of circumstances, that giving so much of the care and education of one's children over to others is the wisest course or is in the best interest of families. Homeschooling may not be the best option for every family, but it is worthy of prayerful discernment and consideration.

In our fast-paced, busyness idolizing world, a homeschooling atmosphere can be a haven for the family. The fulfillment of God's design for the domestic church has a better chance for successfully coming to fruition. There is a control over one's time and a freedom that I would be hard-pressed to give up. If my daughter went to school, she would miss out on the benefits of a Charlotte Mason lifestyle of learning. Because of her unique learning style, she thrives best in a one-on-one teaching situation. We need not fear being "behind", though I know that such worries do intimidate many home educating parents. If we keep our eyes and hearts tuned to pleasing the Savior, faithfully and consistently tending to the work we have been given, then we will enjoy the true measure of our success.