Posted By Christina M on January 16, 2005

I find myself curious this week to hear more from Therese at Exultet about “Cranky Catholics.” I would really like to see more parishes offering more varied opportunities for parishoners to meet and share. Too many Catholics are lonely.

Dawn Patrol maintains its usual high quality of information and commentary as it discusses the United Nations’ opposition to international adoption of tsunami victims. I understand the UN’s reasons, as well as Muslim reasons, for this perspective; but really those reasons are only valid if there are local adoptions available for these children. Such adoptions must be by people who have the means to care for the children, and thus they should not be suffering victims themselves who are in the midst of rebuilding their lives. That pretty much rejects the idea of keeping them local.

Bettnet continues to find and post relevant and interesting information for Catholics with a list of how to identify a good parish, gleaned from Brian St. Paul, editor of Crisis.

What other noteworthy blogs do you want to see mentioned?

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on January 10, 2005

I realized recently that the blogosphere is a very friendly place at times. People link to one another, promote one another, and give kudos where they see fit. I’ve been remiss, and it’s time for me to start giving credit to blogs of note. Today my husband brought me a printout of a blog entry about the French and their sneering about American aid to disaster victims. I’ve heard other things about the sneering before: one French publication actually had the gall (pardon the pun) to be angry with the US for giving, because it made France look bad for not giving. Today, Varifrank has come to my attention with a remarkably lucid defense. It’s well worth reading.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on January 8, 2005

I’ve concluded that, as the word is used today, there are two distinct meanings for the word “lust.” According to the Baltimore Catechism lust, the cardinal sin, is “Lust is an excessive desire for the sinful pleasures forbidden by the Sixth Commandment.” But in common parlance lust, like celibacy, means something more simple than its technical theological definition. Husbands and wives do not sin by desiring one another physically, and strong physical desire — strong enough to act upon — is what many people mean when they use the word in a common sense. In that sense of strong desire, it may or may not be sinful, depending on who feels it for whom, and how they allow their minds or bodies to react to the desirous feelings or thoughts.

Frankly, once married, strong desire is a very nice thing. It goes very well with marital love.

Said my husband this morning, “‘You got your lust in my love!’ ‘You got your love in my lust!'”

Here’s wishing every married couple happiness, security, and plenty of non-sinful desire.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on January 3, 2005

I remember seeing various people cry when favorite celebs died. I myself grieved when Bloom County ended. But I didn’t anticipate the feeling of loss I’d feel about

Dave Barry’s retirement.

I think It’s because I couldn’t envision it happening.

There have been times when I’ve gone weeks, even months, between glimpses at Dave Barry’s column. Then I’d rush over one day in a fit of enthusiasm and gorge. I’d recall all the special moments we shared pondering low flow toilets and war with Canada. Ok, I shared them. I don’t know that he’s aware of my existence. But still.

What I’m trying to say is I took him for granted, and now his column is over. I feel like I should have read him more frequently. I should have laughed more. I think I might have to wear black for a while.

On the other hand, maybe he’s going to write another book. I hope so.

Thanks, Mr. Barry, for the many, many laughs.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on December 30, 2004

It’s that time of year again: the time when I wax self-righteous over the wisest decision I ever made… the time when I become one of those obnoxious givers of romantic advice. Yes, it is my anniversary, and I’m full of gooey romanticism, warm thankfulness, and solid insights about what it takes to make a marriage succeed.

I know, I’m just a two-year veteran. The bloom has not yet faded from the rose, so to speak. Yet the Newlywed Game rules stated that eligibility went to those who had been married less than two years, so I guess we officially qualify as having survived the honeymoon. And I’ll tell you this much: in an objective sense, the honeymoon wasn’t easy.

That isn’t to say that getting along has been difficult, but rather external circumstances have often, in the past two years, offered more challenges than typical newlyweds face. Aside from the fairly common challenges of blending families, we moved three times, had a baby, struggled together through postpartum depression, began homeschooling, and discovered the responsibilities of first time home ownership. I started and quit a really horrible distance school program, while we were living (at the time) in a house half the size we needed for so many people, with no windows that opened. I had moved nearly a thousand miles away from my family, and was homesick, and didn’t have a single friend.

If we could make it through all that and still have any bloom left on our rose, we must be doing something right. Or we must have done something right from the start, when we chose each other as partners for life.

That, I think, is the key.

Marriages can and sometimes do survive between people who are wrong for each other, or people who choose unworthy partners, or people who are not mature enough to make such a commitment. But more often they do not. Rather than hoping a bad marriage can survive despite its wrongness, isn’t it better if we can be fortunate enough to marry well in the first place?

Last year I gave a whole list of things to look for in a spouse. This year, I will focus on just one, because I believe it is the most important. Does your potential spouse make you want to strive to be a better person?

One of the first things that impressed me about my husband was his generosity. He would give money to people he suspected were scamming him, on the off chance that they really did have need. He would give to those who he knew had genuine need… until it hurt. He made a habit of putting other people before himself.

Obviously, I have fared well with this generous nature. He has given me flowers many times in the four years I’ve known him, and he’s endured hardship and discomfort on many occasions in order to do something kind for me. But his generosity has had another more important effect: in seeing this goodness in him, I have grown in desire and determination to be a more generous person myself. If loving him didn’t affect me, change me, then love would be a stagnant and unimportant thing.

The goodness in my spouse makes me want to develop whatever goodness I have in myself. And that is the way it should be. If it didn’t, then it would mean he didn’t have what it takes to move me, to connect with my very soul. It would be a superficial enjoyment, not an abiding love. And certainly not the kind of commitment that can last when enjoyment wanes.

It isn’t just by example that he encourages me to improve, either. He is confident enough of my love that he knows he can encourage me by word, or even by correction, to do right. A good spouse will encourage you to make amends for your mistakes, mend your broken relationships, and live honestly. A good spouse does not want to see you suffer guilt and heartache, and will have the courage to help you avoid both. If he only makes you want to be good, kind, and honest with him, then he isn’t really encouraging goodness but only seeking his own well-being. Such a spouse is to be avoided, because he is selfish. A truly good person, the kind who will be a good spouse, will want you to be as good to others as you are to him.

And if he truly touches your heart, he will inspire you to want to be good to others, too.

A person who really loves you will love all the good in you, not just the good that benefits him. Anyone less isn’t worth marrying.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags: love

Posted By Christina M on December 27, 2004

I don’t even know how to begin to write about a tsunami that kills 20,000 people. One person, two people, we can read about and hurt. Ten people, and we can be shocked. But how do you grieve for a number as large as 20,000? It’s difficult even to conceptualize.

But that’s the number I heard on the radio when I woke up this morning. An earthquake hit deep in the Indian Ocean, and an hour later tsunamis began striking Asian coasts, erasing entire towns. It’s hard to “feel” a calamity of that magnitude. What the victims need right now, though, is not our feelings but our help.

“From the Vatican, Pope John Paul II led appeals for aid for victims, and the 25-nation European Union promised to quickly deliver three million euros.” I can’t help noticing that several of the countries hardest hit have been, for the past few years, terrorizing and torturing Catholics. The Holy Father’s appeal really means something. This is what it means to be a Christian; this is what it means to love. Not to “feel” for the victims, but to help them. Even those who have treated our brothers as enemies.

St. John of the Cross said “Where there is no love, put love, and there you will draw out love.” Let us then follow our Holy Father in offering whatever we can to help the victims of this terrible catastrophe. And in the process, let us not forget to learn the lesson in the Pope’s appeal.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on December 20, 2004

I never do these things, but this time it was just too perfect to resist.

You Are Socks!

Cozy and warm… but easily lost. You make a good puppet.

See, every time the kids hint about what they’re getting for Christmas, I always pretend like I’m doing a shamefully terrible job of hiding that they’re getting socks, the thing I know that deep down they really want most.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on December 18, 2004

Michael Jackson hosted 200 children at Neverland party, making a special appearance and shouting to the kids that he loves them. It seems that despite his pending molestation trial, Mr. Jackson continues to keep a high profile relationship with kids; or maybe because of it. Certainly it makes good public relations.

“You see a whole other side of Michael here and it’s hard to believe there are such charges. So much good is being done and it shouldn’t go untold,” says Imari Conway, one father who was present.

Now, I realize that Jackson has not been tried yet, but if the allegations against him are true, Mr. Conway’s comment seems incredibly naive, at the least. Sure, I know he might be a child molester, but you have to see the good he does for children, too. Like they balance each other out? As though Jackson hosting a child-bait amusement park proves that he couldn’t be doing untoward things with his young visitors?

A lot of people who have done really awful things have also done some really good things. A lot of child molesters have really liked children.

I guess you can color me annoyed. I don’t want Michael Jackson having a media circus to prove how nice he is, to try his case in advance in the media. I also don’t like the idea that a man awaiting trial for child molestation is not being more closely supervised.

I was going to say you wouldn’t find my kids in Jackson’s presence; but on second thought, I with other people’s kids weren’t being exposed to him, either. I know, innocent until proven guilty and all that; but I’m not in the jury, and I can’t be unbiased. If I thought there were even a chance that a person was a child molester, I wouldn’t let him have access to my children. I wish other parents would exercise that same level of caution.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on December 15, 2004

Recent findings have shown American students to be behind students from other industrialized nations in school. The Globe states, however, that “In Washington, D.C., national education officials hailed the higher scores in the eighth grade, especially in algebra. Black and Hispanic students also did better, officials said, crediting the improvement to clearer standards for what schools should teach and greater federal and state oversight of schools.” Elsewhere in the article, they mention that the overall shortcoming might be attributed to a lack of specialization in math in science among teachers.

Although I think that the comment on specialization might bear some truth, we also need to be looking in some other directions. It obviously is true that teachers who know math better can probably teach math more effectively; yet I can’t help but find fault in the idea that the effectiveness of American teaching is being judged, evidently, almost entirely on how well students do in the sciences. This is an area in which Japan has long exceeded us; Japan has a culture very different from that of the United States, and that culture tends to encourage scientific thinking. The American culture tends to encourage individualism and creative thinking.

What I see happening is a trend I noticed even as early as my own childhood: a homogenization of education. More and more, we are judging American students solely on how well they learn the sciences and memorize factoids and formulae. While there certainly is a place for objective fact learning, many other aspects of learning get increasingly neglected in modern American education. At least as important as learning facts is learning to think. At least as important, too, is developing the natural gifts of students. Yet the humanities have been dumbed down in an attempt to appease the growing number of judge-by-the-test critics. Every year more schools decrease their logic and creativity curricula in order to spend more hours “teaching the test.”

Essentially, in order to get better in our weak areas, we are sacrificing our strong areas. We are striving for mediocrity.

When you think of the great accomplishments of American history, what names come to mind? Thomas Jefferson? Benjamin Franklin? Abraham Lincoln? Jefferson’s accomplishments were in the humanities, not the sciences; yet without his genius, the United States literally would not be what it is today. Lincoln’s legacy lies in his social reforms, not his math scores. Even Franklin, who was a brilliant scientist, was first and foremost an innovator. We remember him not because of the facts he learned, but because of the facts he created.

I do not in any way mean by this to demean accomplishments in math and science. To the contrary, I agree that we need more science and math in the average curriculum. Let us not judge our accomplishments solely by testable facts, though. The arts and humanities are just as important as math and science to the betterment of our society and the cultivation of students’ gifts. If we only judge our educational system by how well we fare in our weak areas, we will never be able to cultivate strengths.

Is mediocrity all we hope for in our students?

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags:

Posted By Christina M on December 2, 2004

Back in September, Dan Rather blamed bloggers for bringing his fraud to light. News people should have credibility, bloggers should not — that was his damage control message.

But now Dan rather has resigned and “blog” is the most popular word inWebster’s online dictionary.

The Internet has brought about a monumental change in the way that Americans — and the rest of the world — think. No longer are we told what to think and to believe, but we can examine the evidence for ourselves and draw our own conclusions. Well, that’s not entirely true; media spokespeople still tell us what to believe, but we have resources now at our disposal to check facts and hear both sides.

Americans and other free and democratic-thinking people have an unprecedented opportunity. We have the opportunity to know facts and abate ignorance. I wonder, though, how many people really take advantage of that opportunity. How many people still prefer ignorance, when the facts don’t support their personal biases? How many people don’t bother to check the facts before making their decisions, both about voting and about life?

Sadly, even with so much information literally at our fingertips, a huge portion of our society still values ignorance. From the person who thinks that not knowing where babies come from will ensure that his child will be a virgin at marriage to the abortion lobby that claims to represent “choice” while fighting any law that requires patients to have complete information before making an informed choice, too many people are willing to use falsehood to promote their idea of truth. That’s what it is, really, when we give wrong impressions by restricting access to facts.

What is perhaps even sadder is how many people are still willing to accept it. Millions of abortions occur each year among people who, for the most part, have not bothered to seek out the information themselves about their offspring’s level of development, or how abortions are performed. Hundreds of millions of parents send their children to school without bothering to learn what the schools are presenting as fact. City people make voting decisions about water rights without bothering to find out how farmers in the country use this water to produce the food they eat.

We have tremendous information available to us, but this does not make us informed people. We only become informed when we act upon our responsibility to inform ourselves before making vital decisions. And we can only take credit for the availability of information and knowledge to the extent that we support rights such as full disclosure before abortion.

By blog or by legal document, having information available means we share responsibility to seek and use knowledge.

Category: Uncategorized
No Comments »
Tags: pro life