How Will You Send Off the Old Year and Ring in the New?

The end of the old year for many is an orgy of excess, as though the last day of the year is the final opportunity in life for hedonistic delights. So eat, drink, and be merry and, for some - hopefully not many - drunk-driving collisions.

How will you say good-bye to the old year? I plan to look back, consider the blessings of the past year and its challenges, the things that bring a song of grateful praise to my lips and those that make me blush with embarrassment or shame. For the first I'll thank God; for the second I'll ask His mercy. And I can't think of a better way to welcome the new year than attending the vigil Mass and praying the rosary with my husband, offering it for our family and asking for all the graces to be better Catholics in the year ahead than we were in the year behind us.

Then as the song says, "We'll drink a cup of kindness yet for auld lang syne." Maybe that cup will be filled with Irish coffee (decaf at that hour of the night) or maybe a little red wine in honor of a favorite writer:

"Wherever the Catholic sun does shine there is music, and laughter, and good red wine." Hillaire Belloc

And I'm sure that goes for the Catholic moon as well.

Turning out all the lights except for those on the Nativity scene and the Christmas tree, with carols on the stereo and maybe a blazing fire in the fireplace will set the scene for a peaceful passing of the old year and anticipation of the new. Despite the economic challenges and concerns about the growing darkness in our culture of death, every new year is a time of hope. Remember St. Thomas More's admonition that there is no time so evil a good man cannot live in it.

Resolve to live for Christ in 2009. Make it a year of thanksgiving for all your blessings, sharing those blessings with others less fortunate, and recalling often Pope John Paul II's frequent encouragement to "Be not afraid" and Padre Pio's "Pray, hope, and don't worry."

Facebook and the Mommy Wars

The Mommy Wars are raging on Facebook between nursing mothers who want to let it all hang out and the Facebook admin team who are committed to keeping the site family friendly for all, including children. The war began with moms posting bare-breasted photos, nipples and all including one shot in the bathtub with the baby nursing on the far side in the background and a large bare breast in the foreground. Facebook removed it and other nursing photos for violating their terms of use explaining that, "Photos containing a fully exposed breast - as defined by showing the nipple of areola - do violate those terms on obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit material." The moms responded with a petition drive and a "nurse-in protest" which involved posting more bare-breasted pictures on Facebook. Before dismissing this as the corollary to the Lilliputian War over which end to crack a soft-boiled egg, I think there are some serious issues that bear discussion.

As a former nursing mother who often breast fed in public, I think the moms are absolutely correct that there is nothing obscene or indecent about nursing in public with the proviso that mothers are discreet, modest, and respectful of others. And there's the rub. Many of the photos are neither discreet nor modest. Is it possible to nurse modestly without baring oneself to the world? Of course, I used to wear loose knit tops that fell over the baby's face as he/she nursed and fed my little ones in movie theatres, on mall benches, in church, and wherever else the baby was hungry or needed to be quiet. Once at a meeting a male friend came over to admire my newborn and only when he got close did he realize I was nursing. He couldn't see anything, but got flustered. I just smiled and showed him the baby when I was finished and put back together. A nursing acquaintance of mine took her new, long-awaited baby on a pilgrimage of thanksgiving to Lourdes. She bought a large brimmed bonnet for her little girl and nursed across Europe totally covered by the baby's hat.

But discreet nursing isn't what these moms are talking about. They want to proclaim their right to pop out their breasts in public for all to see. I have known nursing mothers like that. It's as if feeding their babies is not so much about nourishment and nurturing, but a political statement. If you don't like it, don't look, they say. Easier said than done especially if little boys or teenagers on the cusp of manhood are nearby.

So I stand with Facebook on this one; they are upholding common sense. The mothers, on the other hand, are illustrating a grave problem in our culture -- the lost virtues of modesty and prudence. Yes, breastfeeding is natural and good, but it also deserves to be treated with dignity and mystery. Something mystical happens between the little one at the breast who looks into Mommy's eyes and sees her as the first image of God. When Mom shoves her bare breast in the public's face what does she think people see? Certainly not the baby focusing on Mommy's face. No, the breast takes center stage - in a way not too unlike the exploitation of women's bodies in other settings.

Let the breastfeeding moms of the world unite, not in a war over their right to let it all hang out in public, but in a contest on creative ways to breastfeed modestly in public. If these moms think about it perhaps they will have the same concern for young men tempted by nudity, whatever the setting, as they have for the little newborn suckling at the breast.

What is marriage anyway?

With "same-sex marriage" likely to be hotly debated in 2009 and very likely forced on us by out-of-control activist courts, it would be helpful if people would define what they are talking about?

So what is marriage anyway? What is a working definition?

In our culture today there seem to be two views.

The first is that marriage is a contractual union by and for the individuals involved. Its function is their emotional comfort and sexual pleasure and, therefore, its parameters are defined by the individuals contracting the relationship. Society has no role except to recognize and offer the identical legal rights enjoyed by those in traditional marriages.

The second, and still prevalent, view of marriage is as a contractual union between a man and a woman for the purpose of the emotional well-being of husband and wife and the protection, upbringing, and education of the children of the union.

An important question that is often overlooked in the debate over same-sex marriage is "are there implications for society?" If yes will they be positive or negative? While homosexuals claim that there will be no negative aspects to granting them "marriage" rights, the burden of proof must be on them since this is a social experiment of monumental proportions.

There obviously isn't much data about same-sex marriage. But there are many studies that compare the intact nuclear family of mom, dad and children with other arrangements, and children perform better on all of them when they grow up in an intact family with biological/adoptive mom and dad. A heavily-footnoted article at the Heritage Foundation documents many studies that show the benefits to children of growing up in a traditional family.

It makes sense before you hitch a ride on a bandwagon that you know it isn't about to drive over a cliff.

Gays Outraged at the Pope

The gays are furious with the pope for speaking the truth recently. An unofficial translation of his statement was provided by the coadjutor bishop of Lancaster, England. Here's what Pope Benedict said:

"Since faith in the Creator is an essential part of the Christian Credo, the Church cannot and should not confine itself to passing on the message of salvation alone. It has a responsibility for the created order and ought to make this responsibility prevail, even in public. And in so doing, it ought to safeguard not only the earth, water, and air as gifts of creation, belonging to everyone. It ought also to protect man against the destruction of himself. What is necessary is a kind of ecology of man, understood in the correct sense. When the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman and asks that this order of creation be respected, it is not the result of an outdated metaphysic. It is a question here of faith in the Creator and of listening to the language of creation, the devaluation of which leads to the self-destruction of man and therefore to the destruction of the same work of God. That which is often expressed and understood by the term ‘gender;, results finally in the self-emancipation of man from creation and from the Creator. Man wishes to act alone and to dispose ever and exclusively of that alone which concerns him. But in this way he is living contrary to the truth, he is living contrary to the Spirit Creator. The tropical forests are deserving, yes, of our protection, but man merits no less than the creature, in which there is written a message which does not mean a contradiction of our liberty, but its condition. The great Scholastic theologians have characterized matrimony, the life-long bond between man and woman, as a sacrament of creation, instituted by the Creator himself and which Christ-- without modifying the message of creation-- has incorporated into the history of his covenant with mankind. This forms part of the message that the Church must recover the witness in favour of the Spirit Creator present in nature in its entirety and in a particular way in the nature of man, created in the image of God. Beginning from this perspective, it would be beneficial to read again the Encyclical Humanae Vitae: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against sexuality as a consumer entity, the future as opposed to the exclusive pretext of the present, and the nature of man against its manipulation."

The main issues as I see them are:

1) The Church has an obligation to publicly proclaim the truth about the created order including God's creation of humanity as man and woman. Devaluation of this truth leads to the self-destruction of man.

2) We must protect the physical earth but even more so protect man from his own worst instincts. (Implied here is the reality of original and personal sin which destroy man's integrity and make him an enemy of himself.)

3) The terminology of "gender" is an attempt by man to make up his own theology and be his own God.

4) Matrimony is the "sacrament of creation" that Christ made part of his covenant with mankind. Our liberty is conditioned on the correct understanding of this truth.

5) Humanae Vitae defended true love against the view of sex as a consumer item to be manipulated by every fad and perversion of the age.

Reading the pope's words, it's not hard to see why gay drawers are tied in knots. How dare the pope affirm marriage between a man and woman and imply that failure to recognize the creation by God of man and woman (not a panoply of disparate combinations) leads to the "self-destruction of man." Beyond that to imply gender confusion is just as damaging to the earth as the destruction of the rain forests - what a low blow!

Well, rage against the Vicar of Christ when he speaks the truth illustrates that he must be doing something right. So raise a toast to the pope and pray for his continued courage to bear prophetic witness to a world gone mad. And don't be afraid to imitate him by speaking the truth in love even when they stone you for it.

On the Feast of the Holy Family Become Like Little Children

What could be more appropriate than to celebrate the Feast of the Holy Family with a daughter and son-in-law, their four children, and four additional grandchildren whose parents are off on a little Christmas adventure? To add to the fun, one of the wee ones turned three today so we planned a birthday brunch complete with a recycled cake made by stacking and refrosting leftovers from a Christmas eve birthday cake for Jesus. Just think: we avoided increasing the sugar supply, saved money, and minimized our carbon footprints by not using extra electricity to bake a new cake. Wouldn't Al Gore be proud?

I never enjoy life so much as when I am surrounded by a houseful of little voices. Just thinking about them brings a smile to my face and a song to my heart. Jesus must have felt the same way. "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them," he told the apostles, "for it is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs."

Why did Jesus say that? Was he praising their childishness? If he was, he must absolutely love our Peter Pan culture where big babies in adult bodies avoid reality, use sexual promiscuity and other vices as grown-up lollipops, and refuse any adult responsibility to the point of murdering their own children.

No, Jesus wasn't praising children for being childish, but for their innocence, their trusting dependence, and their complete guilelessness. The dictionary defines guile as "treacherous cunning, skillful deceit." When was the last time you were deceived by the "treacherous cunning" of a little child? When did a toddler betray you with a kiss?

The world tends to admire guile especially when the "skillful deceit" succeeds. Saul Alinsky, the father of community organizing whom Barack Obama considers a mentor, taught his followers to use guile whenever necessary to get what they wanted. He called himself the Machiavelli of the poor, as if dishonesty can bring good to anyone. Guile-filled adults cook books and run ponzi schemes that rob hardworking people of their life savings. How many poor people with the "help" of community organizers lost whatever savings they had by the forclosure of a bad loan? Who benefitted? Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and the CEOs of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, not the poor. Guile-filled people believe they are above the rest of men; rules of morality don't apply to them. They make their own rules no matter how evil the outcomes. As the world's powerful ones, they stand at the opposite end of the spectrum from the powerless, especially children.

Fr. John Hardon, SJ often said that only little, humble people will get into heaven. That means adults must foster the virtues of innocence, dependence on God, and guilelessness. Those virtues make one fit to serve the Lord like Nathaniel whom Jesus called to be an apostle saying, "Behold an Israelite indeed in whom there is no guile." Wouldn't you love to be described by the Lord in that fashion? The prescription is simple even if filling it is hard. Choose the virtue and work toward it every day through practice. That could make a great new year's resolution!

Make 2009 the year you study St. Thomas Aquinas

I was a young adult during the turbulent sixties. I entered college in Washington, D.C. in 1964 and graduated in 1968. What a time: lunch counter sit-ins, , assassinations, the rebellion following Humanae Vitae, D.C. riots not far from campus, drugs, sex, rock and roll, bell bottom trousers, mini-skirts and tie-dyed T-shirts, the mantra: "If it feels good do it." Blowing your mind was a phrase that describes the decade well. Reason was thrown out the window, and feelings raged unchecked. What chaos! I don't remember the sixties with fondness, but relief that I survived despite the fact that almost every cultural anchor (including the hierarchy of the Church) failed us. Many self-destructed on the shoals and haven't recovered yet. How many today base their opinions on "personal truth" which is nothing more than feelings and rationalizations to do whatever they please? The culture endorses this irrational approach to life. Since the 60s, schools have focused more on promoting self-esteem than critical thinking skills.

But there's hope. St. Thomas Aquinas, that champion of wisdom, logic, and clear reasoning, is making a comeback. Thomas had a profound impact on the areas of ethics, philosophy and political theory. He is among the Doctors of the Church and one of the greatest thinkers of all times. If you want to know the truth about the big questions of life, you can hardly do better than to study St. Thomas and his method of examining life. Pope Leo XIII considered him an effective prescription against modernism and, during his pontificate, called for schools of higher education to teach Thomistic philosophy.

The Summa Theologica offers an excellent example in how to find the truth about any subject. St. Thomas states the question, then provides the objections; then he answers each objection and makes a declaration. His approach is open-minded and respectful of disagreement. It thoroughly and seriously evaluates all aspect of an issue. The desired end, for St. Thomas, as it should be for all of us, is to know the truth; and Thomas is methodical in his search. If he seems obscure at first, he becomes clearer and clearer the more you read him. As Peter Kreeft says, "St. Thomas aimed only for light, not heat." Aquinas' writings, he says, are filled with wisdom.

Make St. Thomas a guide in 2009. More and more our culture is returning to chaos, but St. Thomas can be a rock and an anchor against the current of confusion. He knew what philosophy truly was, "not the study of what men have opined, but of what is the truth." If you want to know the truth, study St. Thomas.

In the Shadow of the Christmas Star

Today Catholics celebrate the feast of St. Stephen, the first martyr. In her wisdom the Church follows the joyful celebration of Christ's birth with the solemn reminder that following the Lord means to "pick up your cross" and follow Him. We must be ready to carry it wherever the Savior leads - even to a bloody martyr's death. Stephen dies under a hail of rocks thrown by a mob. With a vision before his eyes he prays for forgiveness of his murderers. In that screaming mob stands Saul, the future St. Paul, whose misguided zeal leads him to endorse the killing. Think of zealous Muslem terrorists invoking Allah to justify their evil acts and you won't be too far off from the future saint who will hear Jesus call, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

When I was confirmed, made a "soldier of Christ," the bishop ended the sacrament with a tap on the cheek, a reminder that following Christ means being ready to suffer. Unfortunately, that meaningful symbol has disappeared from the rite. Too bad. It sent a graphic message that the Christian life isn't for sissies and wimps. It takes strength, courage, fortitude, and a lifetime commitment.

It's easy to follow the star to the stable, a sanitized stable without the smell of manure and urine. Following Christ on the dangerous road to Egypt in the dead of night or up the rocky hill to Calvary is another story, one many would rather not live out.

Christmas Day and St. Stephen's feast day are the mini-series of the Christian life with only the ending shrouded in darkness, our personal ending. Will we see the vision of beatitude and hear the words "well done, good and faithful servant?" If we are willing to follow in the footsteps of St. Stephen and accept and turn to good the small, everyday sufferings and persecutions of life, we need not fear.

MERRY CHRISTMAS FROM LES FEMMES

Browsing Home Schooling Blogs

I'm a blog browser. I especially enjoy visiting home schooling families because, as Fr. John Hardon, SJ often said, they are the monasteries of our time - preserving Catholic (and Christian) traditions and culture. They also are great watchdogs who alert us to what's happening to ordinary people when they displease Big Brother. Here are a few interesting blogs to visit.

Under her starry mantle is the blog of a mom of six in Australia. Check out her directions for making a poinsettia wreath for the O Antiphons during the last days of Advent. It may be too late to do it this year, but what a great project! There's lots more practical ideas for home schooling families.

Family in Feast and Feria doesn't feature as many pictures, but has some fun posts including Name that Christmas Carol with lines from popular carols and a challenge to identify them. I got most of them and enjoyed just thinking about how many beautiful religious songs enrich the season.

Spunky Home School has an alarming story about a family with ten children raided by the Ohio State Agriculture Dept. because they were running a co-op for families who wanted to get organic food. They called it an illegal retail store! The cops came in with guns drawn and thuggish behavior, kept the family corralled in their living room for six hours, and confiscated a year's worth of their own food as well as the co-op food. They also took computers and other items like cell phones. I used to be in a food co-op. We took turns buying the food, dividing it, and collecting money. What's ironic is that this family contacted the state in 2007 to make sure they were meeting all the requirements. After not responding to the family's mail for a year, the raid came out of the clear blue. Why didn't someone just call them and make an appointment? There's a lawsuit in the works.

Happy browsing and if you know of a good home school website, leave the address in the comment section. I have some happy memories from my five years as a home schooling mom!

Congress Gets Merry Christmas and a $4700 Pay Hike

Congress is smart - like the proverbial fox. Our lawmakers know how to feather their own "nests":

1) raid the hen house,
2) grab a chicken by the neck,
3) enjoy the innards for lunch
4) use the outers to make a nice warm feather bed

Yes, Congress is smart. Our lawmakers set up their pay increases automatically. It spares them the unpleasantness of a recorded vote which might upset their constituents. So while more than two million Americans line up for unemployment, the very ones who helped create the financial crisis (Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, etc.) will enjoy, not only the fruits of their conflicts of interest with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but will reach deeper into the taxpayers' pockets for their $4700 pay raise. The average lawmaker's salary is $169,300. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi takes home $217,400. Of course that doesn't include the perks, privileges, and office expenses billed to the taxpayer as well. Do we get our money's worth? Maybe not, but the amusement value is worth a little something. After all, they told America's CEOs to take a salary this year of $1. But those guys are rich, not like Senators Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton.

To be fair, not all Congressmen support the automatic pay hike. Rep. Harry Mitchell, a first-term Democrat from Arizona, introduced a bill to freeze salaries. He had 34 co-sponsors but the legislation didn't even make it out of committee. Surprise, surprise. Heck, where's my Christmas spirit. Joe Biden and Barack Obama have told us we need to be patriotic and not mind higher taxes to help others. And, after all, charity begins at home. What could be homier than the halls of Congress?

So Merry Christmas from the taxpayers! Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank and all you other Foxy Loxies, enjoy your plum pudding while you think about the elderly living below the poverty line and the millions out of work. I'm sure it will bring a smarmy tear to your eye as you lift a glass of sherry to the politically correct spirits of the holiday season.