When we had just had our fourth child, some b****y doctor tried to tell me that I shouldn't beget any more. I felt like precipitating him down the stairs. But at that time I lacked the manly resolution that comes of being a Proper Catholic. So I dithered.
If Alberto Gasparri were to tell me that the ideal size for a family is three, I think, being now in Full Communion, I would loyally take the wise advice of the Sovereign Pontiff, and instantly thump him before I thought better of it.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
was for nearly three decades at Lancing College; where he taught Latin and Greek language and literature, was Head of Theology, and Assistant Chaplain. He has served three curacies, been a Parish Priest, and Senior Research Fellow at Pusey House in Oxford. Since 2011, he has been in full communion with the See of S Peter. The opinions expressed on this Blog are not asserted as being those of the Magisterium of the Church, but as the writer's opinions as a private individual. Nevertheless, the writer strives, hopes, and prays that the views he expresses are conformable with and supportive of the Magisterium. In this blog, the letters PF stand for Pope Francis. On this blog, 'Argumentum ad hominem' refers solely to the Lockean definition, Pressing a man with the consequences of his own concessions'.
... once graced the high altar of the church of Sancta Maria in Ara Coeli on the Capitoline Hill.
Fr John Hunwicke
was for nearly three decades at Lancing College; where he taught Latin and Greek language and literature, was Head of Theology, and Assistant Chaplain. He has served three curacies, been a Parish Priest, and Senior Research Fellow at Pusey House in Oxford. Since 2011, he has been in full communion with the See of S Peter. The opinions expressed on this Blog are not asserted as being those of the Magisterium of the Church, but as the writer's opinions as a private individual. Nevertheless, the writer strives, hopes, and prays that the views he expresses are conformable with and supportive of the Magisterium. In this blog, the letters PF stand for Pope Francis. On this blog, 'Argumentum ad hominem' refers solely to the Lockean definition, Pressing a man with the consequences of his own concessions'.
Archive
-
▼
2015
(284)
-
▼
January
(34)
- RORATE does it again.
- blessed Charles Stuart
- Patrimony and the Pallium
- Only for philologists
- Cardinal Rodriguez
- Tunc erat bibendum ...
- PASTORAL LETTERS
- At long last, Fr Tim ...
- Judas College
- Women priests .... again? ... groan groan ... er ....
- Memories
- Wolves again?
- Councils.
- Equipollent Beatification and Canonisation
- Alberto Gasparri
- Thumping people who insult your mother
- Allahu Akbar
- Court List
- MISTRANSLATIONS
- (2) THE 1990s Translation. Lord, Holy Father, Alm...
- The European Doctrinal Commissions ...
- Growing the Ordinariate Liturgy
- Queuing up
- Je suis ...
- Charlie encore
- versus populum, versus Orientem
- Charlie update
- Update on killing
- KILLING
- Pope or Tradition?
- Hats
- Learning from Luther
- John Lamont's article ...
- Happy New Year of Consecrated Life, Happy New Year...
-
▼
January
(34)
Popular Posts
-
More Update: Perhaps I should have been more explicit about the complete wrongheadedness of the sort of speculations which could be triggere...
-
There are wild rumours on the Internet about News due to break tomorrow, Sunday. They are, as far as I know, all wrong. Far too wild. Far to...
-
To refresh your memories, I reprint a piece I wrote when an earlier electronic edition of the Dictator Pope was published under a pseudonym:...
-
So a correspondent wrote on one of my threads. It set me thinking. I am convinced that PF is most certainly not the worst man ever to hav...
-
Perhaps a couple of years ago, in Western Ireland, I had the privilege to be in the company of a very great prelate just after he had offere...
-
"After this Magisterium, after this long journey, we can affirm with certainty and with Magisterial authority that the Liturgical Refor...
-
Lead us not into temptation. It is unlikely that the Greek and Latin words translated by temptation meant the sort of thing we mean by '...
-
Pope Francis breaks his silence! A "In authorising regular use of the older Mass, now referred to as the 'extraordinary form'...
-
The heart of the Bergoglianist error is, in my fallible opinion, to be found in such texts as the letter Archbishop Nichols wrote last year ...
Followers
Links
Raffaello's Madonna di Foligno
... once graced the high altar of the church of Sancta Maria in Ara Coeli on the Capitoline Hill.
11 comments:
I had not quite thought of it this way, Father.
I was feeling somewhat insulted on behalf of my saintly Mother and my heroic Father, and in reading your words, I now realize that the Holy Father has already advised me to punch the man who called them irresponsible in the nose, however high his station.
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
After our fourth, I was told by "a friend" to stop procreating and start recreating! After our fifth, I ran into her again. I told her I was sorry but thought she meant I should create again. She was not amused. I was!
I thought Pope Francis said that an ideal *minimum* was three? (Specifically he'd said he thought three was the minimum number of children necessary per couple to sustain the population -- actually it's 2.1, so two kids for every nine couples and a third for the tenth would suffice).
Three would certainly be an ideal minimum, and a vast improvement over the low Catholic fertility of the present age. But why stop at 3? We want to grow, not tread water. How about we shoot for something closer to, say, 7?
It makes you wonder where exactly the massive plague of "rabbits" is hiding in Rome. Last time I was there it was strong on feral cats, but short on children.
Based on the Holy Father's contrast of Catholics & rabbits, I understand him to mean that we are not to average 6 children per month. While perhaps not magisterial, I admit the advice is sound and more importantly not inconsistent with Tradition.
If the recommendation of three children per family is a minimum, that is still a tall order to accomplish every month.
On a serious note, whenever the topic of limiting family size arises I think of the couples who desperately desire to have another child, or even a first child, and cannot for one reason or another. And I think of the youngest of 4, or 5, or 10, and whether the world would be better off had they never been born; surely even a secular public has at least seen It's a Wonderful Life and knows the answer?
An interesting commentary on the underlying Malthusian fear (I assume Rev. Malthus is NOT part of the Anglican Patrimony??):
From Stephen Leacock's "What is Possible and What is Not"
But it is time that the Malthusian doctrine,--the fear of over-population as a hindrance to social reform,--was dismissed from consideration. It is at best but a worn-out scarecrow shaking its vain rags in the wind. Population, it is true, increases in a geometrical ratio. The human race, if favored by environment, can easily double itself every twenty-five years. If it did this, the time must come, through sheer power of multiplication, when there would not be standing room for it on the globe. All of this is undeniable, but it is quite wide of the mark. It is time enough to cross a bridge when we come to it. The "standing room" problem is still removed from us by such uncounted generations that we need give no thought to it. The physical resources of the globe are as yet only tapped, and not exhausted. We have done little more than scratch the surface. Because we are crowded here and there in the ant-hills of our cities, we dream that the world is full. Because, under our present system, we do not raise enough food for all, we fear that the food supply is running short. All this is pure fancy. Let any one consider in his mind's eye the enormous untouched assets still remaining for mankind in the vast spaces filled with the tangled forests of South America, or the exuberant fertility of equatorial Africa or the huge plains of Canada, Australia, Southern Siberia and the United States, as yet only thinly dotted with human settlement. There is no need to draw up an anxious balance sheet of our assets. There is still an uncounted plenty. And every human being born upon the world represents a power of work that, rightly directed, more than supplies his wants...."
Oh yum, what I wouldn't give for a head of lettuce and two or three carrots right now . . . maybe even a picture of Elmer Fudd for my dartboard !
We're only just getting started too : The one Holy Catholic Apostolic Church is also known as Holy Mother Church . . .Imagine the possibilities - Who hasn't insulted Her at least once in their lifetime ? We could all don a pair of boxing gloves (or "drop the gloves" as we say over here) and have one big free-for-all. Practically every Catholic in the world would have a black eye and a fat lip before we ever got started on those not in communion with us. But don't worry - we'll bring them all into the One fold too . . . Baptism by Bruises !
Thanks to all these off the cuff remarks/comments (while we're still on the subject of being , um, "responsible") which the flighty media are using to stir up all sorts of confusion, it's like we (honest to goodness Catholics) are being forced to live in a bad cartoon.
A little more than fortuitous note of interest, perhaps, that the rabbit in Disney's animated classic Bambi , happens to be named Thumper ?
After reading the actual transcript of what the Holy Father said, it seems that the media has been up to its usual tricks of distortion again.
It was a reporter who raised the "high" number of 3 children per family being the cause of poverty in the Philippines. The Holy Father responded that, according to experts, 3 children was the minimum number required to keep a population going and anything less than this led to demographic problems.
He did not say that Catholics should limit themselves to 3 children. Rather the implication was that this number should be the minimum per family.
Sorry to hear that Fr. When I went to see the doc beaming happily on the conception of our first and only long awaited child he asked me if I wanted to have "it". It sickened me to the stomach I have to say. It was obvious I was happy about the baby. We were 5 years married and it was our first child. Why he felt the need to allude to murdering the baby I do not know. All I know is that it so saddened my heart on hearing it. It's a death cult and it is disgusting.
I am No 9 of 10, and I am very thankful to my Traditional Lutheran mother who rejected any type of birth control due to her sobber, straight moral contiousness.
Post a Comment