Homeschooling and Catholicism

In case you are new to the series, you can start at the series opening or the first series post.

Since I have already talked so much about the importance of homeschooling in relation to Catholicism in my past three posts,

• The Dreaded “S” Word
• What makes homeschooling different?
• Why is homeschooling important?

I only have a few more things to say on the topic.

Passing on our Catholic faith is of utmost importance as parents. Our whole God-given parenting goal is to get our children to heaven. How can we do this without teaching the faith? Children should learn the Truths of the faith, the basic Bible story and timeline, and how to properly defend the faith. This can be done with the Catechism, the Bible, and a few apologetic works.

This is the most important reason to homeschool, because this duty is ours alone and in order to have a complete education, a study of Catholic doctrine, as well as apologetics and Bible history must also be included. To leave God out of the equation of education is to leave a gaping hole in our history, and more importantly in our life. It also excludes morality from all subjects because morals are based on religious beliefs. How can one say that a war was waged for the wrong reasons or a ruler was unjust without giving an explanation based upon religious tenets?

We must also make sure that our children learn the truth about sex, homosexuality, and other issues that are taught immorally and way too early. These subjects can be dealt with when appropriate and in the proper religious context so that are children are not confused.

By bringing children into the world and baptizing them in the faith, we have made the commitment before God and the community that we will teach our children. How can we then abnegate this responsibility?

For more information on homeschooling, please read the resources listed here.

Homeschooling: The Dreaded "S" Word

In case you are new to the series, you can start at the series opening or the first series post.

Though the perceived lack of socialization is one of the most common objections people have to homeschooling, I am not concerned with it. Why am I so confident about my children having friends and learning how to “play nice” with others? Well, I have many reasons. That specific question can be summed up as follows: they do not need to be in a traditional school environment in order to have friends and learn to get along.

First and foremost, one of the reasons I do not want them in a traditional school environment is the type of “socialization” that goes on there. I mentioned it in this post, but it bears repeating:

“Children (and adults) have a grave need to be kept away from temptation so as not to fall into sin. Both public and private schools (secular and Christian) are full of foul language, materialism, sexual information, tolerance and encouragement of sin, and false religions. All these things can cause children to succumb to sin and turn away from their family even with a Godly, religious upbringing. The large amount of time children spend in school, school activities, and transiting to and from (seven to eleven hours on school days, nine months a year) as well as the strong urge to fit in can easily allow children to be led down the wrong path.”

School, even Catholic school, is too often the place where children learn inappropriate ideas and behaviors. Rather, children should be sheltered from such things until they are properly educated so as not to be swayed by popular opinion. As Chesterton says in the book All Things Considered, “Right is right even if nobody does it. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong about it.” Young children and even old children will have a hard time understanding this and respecting it when they are pressured by others or just want to be accepted.

Children feel a need to fit in. In schools, most children are ostracized if they do not have a cell phone, wear designer clothes and shoes, watch the latest TV programs or play the latest video games, possess the latest toys, or fulfill all other forms of materialism. This can lead to bullying and other major problems, especially when the child no longer feels accepted. Yet, this mindset of needing to have the latest and greatest is typical of the worldly, which is exactly what we as Catholics are called to avoid.

Finally, where else in life are we separated into groups based solely on age? It is certainly not done at work, church, or even college! These institutions are a mix of many different ages, races, and backgrounds; so, it would seem even to the opponents of homeschooling that proper socialization happens when the child is exposed to other children and adults of all ages. Children need to learn how to get along with and respect others of all ages. How is this being taught in a classroom of ten-year-olds?

My confidence comes from knowing children will learn proper socialization in the home and community. Homeschoolers are not shut up at home twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. They are more exposed to their siblings, children of all ages from other homeschooling families, and adults from all over the community. So now the question becomes: how is it even considered proper socialization to expose children to materialism, peer pressure, and age-class?

For more information on homeschooling, please read the resources listed here.

Homeschooling: What makes it different?

In case you are new to the series, you can start at the series opening or the first series post.

After my last post, where I explained what makes homeschooling so important, I would now like to talk about the benefits that make it so different (and better).

As common sense would show, one-on-one tutoring is more beneficial than one teacher for a classroom of twenty to thirty or more students. The child receives individual attention and focus. He or she can ask questions or interrupt whenever there is a misunderstanding. The teacher will almost immediately know when the child does not understand the material. Therefore, the learning is at the child’s own pace.

All of us excel in some subjects and need more work in others, but in a classroom setting, the teacher must teach at whatever pace will benefit the class as a whole, not one individual. This can cause boredom and laziness in students who excel at the material. I can certainly vouch for that! The boredom I experienced from school turned me away from learning for quite a few years. Students who have trouble with the material will be left behind and some will never catch up. I experienced this through my “tutoring” of others in middle school and high school. In the home school, each subject is learned at the child’s pace so that he may be at a fourth grade reading level and a sixth grade math level in the same year.

The parent can incorporate the child’s own learning style into the lesson. This is especially helpful for visual or kinesthetic learners who have a difficult time learning from a lecture in a classroom. Many children lag behind in a specific subject only because they are not experiencing the material in the way they can absorb it most efficiently.

Homeschooling also allows for younger ones to be able to move around more when learning. Often times, young children, boys especially, need a break to “get the wiggles out”. You can even incorporate movement while learning if the child is really active. In a classroom setting, this would cause chaos! As I noted before, there are some schools that no longer allow recess. Many others, as discussed in this article, are trying to limit the opportunities for play. I cannot imagine the plight of those teachers!

With all the government regulation regarding school, it is no wonder why some children excel, while others are left behind. They are all forced to start school at the same age! Some children are ready to start earlier, but will be held back because they are too young; therefore, they will be bored in school, having to learn at a slower pace. Other children may not be ready until the next year, but must start at the mandated age, because that is what the government decided.

Homeschooling is also better for the character development of the child. I cannot count the amount of articles I have read regarding parents who say their children do not have time for chores because their schedules are so full—between school, homework, and extracurricular activities. To do their part for the family, children should be assigned chores according to their ability. When children stay home, they are also more exposed to cooking and shopping and will have a better perspective on true family life (as opposed to those children who are so busy away from home that they do not even have time to help).

As I discussed in my last post, teaching our children about Catholicism is one of the most important duties we have as parents. We should not be relying on schools (whether CCD classes or Catholic schools) to teach our children doctrine. This allows error to be portrayed as truth through other people’s opinions, views, and beliefs being interjected into the teaching or from answering questions. Also, religion must be avoided in public school because of the difference between religions and the “need” for tolerance, and a weekly CCD class from first through eighth grade instills very little catechesis—I say this from experience. The ability to add our religious teaching to the yearly curriculum, without the outside influence of others, sets homeschooling apart from all other types of learning environments.

Classroom settings offer pretty much a one-size-fits-all approach. To offer anything else would be out of the teacher’s ability. Homeschooling fits the material to the child, instead of the other way around. Is it any wonder why most homeschooling students have better test scores and are even preferred by colleges?

For more information on homeschooling, please read the resources listed here.

Homeschooling: Why Is It Important?

In case you are new to the series, you can start at the series opening or the first series post.


Although not everyone has the ability to homeschool (because of financial or other concerns), it is important for so many reasons and I will try to address as many of them as possible in this post; so it is rather long.

As emphasized by a declaration from the Second Vatican Council and by Blessed Pope John Paul II in two different writings, we as parents must keep in mind that we are not only the primary but also the principle educators of our children. This duty was not given by the Church but by God himself and as such this right is completely inalienable. (See Familiaris Consortio, 40.) In Proverbs 1:8, the child is told “Hear, my son, your father’s instruction, and reject not your mother’s teaching.” We must teach our children from the beginning about the world and about God. It is our duty and our right to be the principle teachers of our children, not to surrender our responsibility to someone else.

Whether we want the duty or not we are the primary teachers of religion. Our attitudes, actions, beliefs, and words will form the child in his or her view of religion. Catholic schools are not designed to be the only or even the primary teachers of religion, because the child will follow the parent, not the teacher. Therefore, homeschooling fulfills the duty for us as parents to educate our children, especially where religion is concerned.

Along with this, I must emphasize the principle of subsidiarity. Subsidiarity is a principle of Catholic social teaching which states that all institutions exist for the sake of the individual/family so that whatever the individual/family is able to do, society should not take over and what small societies can do, larger societies should not take over. Below are two excerpts from writings of Blessed John Paul II.

Familiaris Consortio, 45: “But society -- more specifically the state -- must recognize that ‘the family is a society in its own original right’ [111], and so society is under a grave obligation in its relations with the family to adhere to the principle of subsidiarity. The public authorities should take care not to take from families the functions that they can just as well perform on their own or in free associations; instead it must positively favor and encourage as far as possible responsible initiative by families.”

Letter to Families, 16: “Parents are the first and most important educators of their own children, and they also possess a fundamental competence in this area: they are educators because they are parents. They share their educational mission with other individuals or institutions, such as the Church and the State. But the mission of education must always be carried out in accordance with a proper application of the principle of subsidiarity. This implies the legitimacy and indeed the need of giving assistance to the parents, but finds its intrinsic and absolute limit in their prevailing right and their actual capabilities” [emphasis original].

Thus, when parents have the ability to teach their own children, it becomes important that they do. They have the ultimate responsibility as primary and principle educators of their children to teach them the ways of the world. As Chesterton says in What’s Wrong with the World, “How can it be a large career to tell other people's children about the Rule of Three, and a small career to tell one's own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone?” Governments cannot usurp this responsibility from parents, although many states try. Parents have an obligation and a right to decide what is important for their children to study and to teach it to them. The government’s role is to make sure children are being taught, but not to tell the parents what to teach.

We must also heed the warning from Chesterton in one of his Illustrated London News articles when he says, “The purpose of Compulsory Education is to deprive the common people of their commonsense.” Looking back at my old education post, we recall this quote from the HSDLA.

“Is it merely a coincidence that the two countries [Germany and Japan] whose educational system we have most admired gave rise to totalitarian states in the 20th century, bent on world domination? Looking into the dying embers of two world wars should remind us that the utopian impulse that lures men to entrust control of the individual—including compulsory attendance and state control of education—to the wisdom of the state, sets the stage for corrupt and domineering governments. And, as experience should have taught us, this can lead to horrible results. Although today’s proponents of compulsory attendance will argue that their purpose is benign, when the power to control education is concentrated in the hands of a few, it can easily be turned toward objectives which are not all benign.”

We must be careful sending our children away for nine months a year, twelve to fourteen years of their young, moldable lives, especially when there is plenty of evidence of schools keeping parents out of the loop. How many children are graduating today, after twelve years of school, without the ability to perform simple math problems or to write articulately? As parents, it seems by giving up our responsibility to the government, we have ourselves allowed education to decline.

The purpose of compulsory education today is quite different than when it first came into law. In the 1800’s, its main purpose was to keep children out of the work force and teach them to become good citizens. Today, it seems to be solely about test scores—teachers teach to the tests as well as teaching test-taking skills. Many schools have gotten rid of recess time and some have even gotten rid of the playground. (Yes, it is true. I have read the news articles.) The authorities think more time sitting in a classroom will somehow make better students, but many of the boys are being drugged with ADHD medications in order to keep them still (more on that later). Meanwhile, many young homeschooling students are finished before lunch and have higher test scores!

Children (and adults) have a grave need to be kept away from temptation so as not to fall into sin. Both public and private schools (secular and Christian) are full of foul language, materialism, sexual information, tolerance and encouragement of sin, and false religions. All these things can cause children to succumb to sin and turn away from their family even with a Godly, religious upbringing. The large amount of time children spend in school, school activities, and transiting to and from (seven to eleven hours on school days, nine months a year) as well as the strong urge to fit in can easily allow children to be led down the wrong path. This article shares a similar perspective: Parents: Beware the Danger of Peer Orientation.

We must always remember that even though we live in the world, we are not of the world. As Romans 12:2 says, “And be not conformed to this world: but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good and the acceptable and the perfect will of God.” Cultures, society, sometimes even laws must not keep us from living as true Catholics. The popular opinion, government mandates, and even “majority rule” do not imply goodness or Godliness. Let us look at James 1:27. “Religion clean and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their tribulation and to keep one's self unspotted from this world [emphasis added].” It is clear that we must not live as if we are of this world and it follows that we must not allow our children to live as if they are of this world as well. Looking back at the previous paragraph, we can see that the influence of others can and most likely will greatly exceed our own as parents when the children are sent off to school.

Finally as mentioned above, the bible stresses the importance of parents passing on their faith. Blessed Pope John Paul II in his Letter to Families says, “Certainly one area in which the family has an irreplaceable role is that of religious education, which enables the family to grow as a ‘domestic church’” (16, emphasis original). We cannot send our children off to Catholic school and expect any faith teaching to stick if we are not practicing our faith and setting the example in the home. In the Second Vatican Counsel’s declaration Gravissimum educationis, Pope Paul VI states, “Since parents have given children their life, they are bound by the most serious obligation to educate their offspring and therefore must be recognized as the primary and principal educators. This role in education is so important that only with difficulty can it be supplied where it is lacking” (3).

Public schools, especially, cannot teach religion to children when there are children from twenty different religions present in the classroom. Yet, Chesterton says in What’s Wrong with the World, “It is quaint that people talk of separating dogma from education. Dogma is actually the only thing that cannot be separated from education. It is education. A teacher who is not dogmatic is simply a teacher who is not teaching.” Even when the schools are trying to avoid religion, they are still actually teaching it. They just choose, willingly or unconsciously, to teach atheism.

As you can see, there are so many immensely important reasons to homeschool our children. If you can make the sacrifice to teach your children, you should do so, for their benefit and the benefit of this country and the world. Where the family goes, society will follow.

For more information on homeschooling, please read the resources listed here.

Homeschooling: A Brief History

In case you are new to the series, you can start at the series opening or the first series post.

What we consider “traditional education” today, is actually not traditional at all. As seen from my regulation of education post, compulsory attendance did not come into law until 1852 in America. Before the 1800s, homeschooling had been the main approach to education since the beginning of time, only the methods and subjects have changed. Some children, mostly those of the wealthy, were taught by tutors while most children were simply taught basic life skills and religion by their parents.

The Catholic missionaries set up schools to teach things such as reading and Catholic doctrine, and some missions even taught math and astronomy, but these schools were primarily for adults who would then go home to teach their children.

Between the 1920s and 1970s, because of the compulsory attendance laws, it was illegal to teach children at home. Homeschooling during this time still existed, but was underground and mostly in rural areas. Some parents set up small private schools as a way to overcome academic and doctrinal issues in public schools.

During the 1970s, radicals helped push for homeschooling and by 1982 three states recognized the right to homeschool. Today, homeschooling is legal in all fifty states, but more than half have moderate to high regulations.

For more information on homeschooling, please read the resources listed here.

The Importance of Education: What is a proper education?

In case you are new to the series, you can start at the series opening or the first series post.

A proper education can be defined by many things, but most importantly is the retention of facts learned and the ability to speak and write coherently. To achieve these things, a few basic principles and subjects must be employed.

Similar to the way unit studies connect multiple subjects to one basic theme, a proper education should be connected across the curricula so as to help the child better connect ideas and remember them. The way to achieve this is through the proper study of history. Almost every subject can be connected to history: music, art, science, literature, writing, even math problems. And the best way to study history (and consequently, the other subjects) is chronologically so that the child can place events in their proper context and also better remember past events that may be connected.

Rote learning, a technique used to memorize facts is a simple way to retain information. The major practice is repetition. One way to accomplish this through history is to break the chronology of history into four parts and repeat them through the school years. In the Well-Trained Mind, Susan Wise Bauer breaks history down in this way: ancient times, Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, and modern era. As history is repeated, more details are learned and since history is learned chronologically, events such as wars are better understood.

A proper education also includes phonics, instead of whole word (or sight word) reading. Children are better able to read and learn new words faster and easier when they know the proper sounds for each letter or group of letters. I do not understand how the phonics method could have lost its appeal in the school system!

The use of logic and rhetoric are extremely important in a proper education. This gives children the ability to organize information properly and express their thoughts articulately, while making a sound argument. It also gives them the ability to see through fallacies and propaganda.

A study of Latin will complete the education by giving the ability to increase vocabulary and spelling. Latin words and derivatives comprise close to fifty percent of the English language, and English grammar is based upon Latin. French, Spanish, and Italian are also related to Latin and will therefore be easier to learn. From the Catholic standpoint, Latin is important in the Church and many documents, prayers, and songs, as well as the Tridentine mass and the Vulgate are in Latin.

Marriage Series: Soul Mates

I do not have any Catholic sources for this post, only my own thoughts and ideas. But I believe my reasoning is based on common sense, reality, and faith—and that is where I will start.

So many people have this idea of “soul mates”. They feel, as I used to, that somewhere in this huge, ever-growing world there is only one person that God designed for them to marry. And somehow we will “just know” when we meet the right one, the only one, for us.

Why would this be a false idea? How could this become a problem? A few things Catholic come to mind. First, in the Bible, it states that if you become a widow, you are free to marry again, because the marriage bond is broken through death (and only through death). How could we marry another if there was only one God-created spouse out there for us?

Second, what if, with all our human faults and failings, we marry the wrong one? Then one day we meet the “perfect one”, our soul mate? Shouldn’t we be able to divorce our current spouse to marry this one person God created for us? Well, as stated above, it is only through death that the marriage bond is broken and since killing is a sin, we will be stuck with our spouse until they die naturally!

This idea has hurt so many people and so many marriages. People think that when someone “better” comes along, they should divorce their current spouse and marry the lover. But the grass is not greener, as “love” comes in stages and the first stage of love is the only one most people actually consider love. (If you don’t have those butterflies in your stomach or the cheesy grin on your face, you must have “fallen out of love”. I will talk more about this erroneous notion later.)

So if we do not have a soul mate, how do we know how to pick a spouse? Courtship.

Up Next: Courtship vs. Dating

For full texts of the documents used, see my Marriage Series: Introduction

Food, Naturally: Why Eat Real Food, Part I

In case you are new to the series, you can start at the beginning or the introduction.

Why is where we begin all reasonable discussions. This is the reason for including it at the beginning of the series, rather than specifically with each subsequent post. We should think for ourselves, because some things that “experts” or “researchers” say are actually harmful to us and we may not know or understand that without coming to our own conclusion beyond “so-and-so said I should”.

For everything, it is best to use common sense. Eating food is no different. Just as with other things, people (including myself) can get lazy and decide that “others must know better than I do” or “if they make it, it must be safe”. The worst excuse we use is “if government officials say something is or is not safe, they must be right”.

Using common sense with food is so easy, though. God made our bodies to function using the food that He gave us and people ate this way for thousands of years. Yet, in the past century or two, man thought he could make it easier on everyone by developing his own food in factories and over-crowded farms. This food can never compare to what God gave us. God knew what we needed to survive and thrive, to live longer and healthier. Processed and industrially-farmed food can never compare to Food, Naturally.

Marriage Series: An Introduction to Marriage

As I have discussed previously on this blog, marriage is a vocation. It is a beautiful, God-given relationship designed to express the life-giving love of God. God designed marriage from the beginning: Genesis 2:22-24.

22 And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam. 23 And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. 24 Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh.

As a vocation, marriage is extremely important and not to be taken lightly. A search online through the Catechism brought up 77 paragraphs including the word “marriage”! Throughout this series, I will try to elaborate as much as possible on the importance of marriage, its meaning and its purpose.

This opening from the Bishops’ “Statement on Same-Sex Marriage” is a beautiful way to end my Introduction on Marriage:

“The Roman Catholic Church believes that marriage is a faithful, exclusive, and lifelong union between one man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of life and love. This union was established by God with its own proper laws. By reason of its very nature, therefore, marriage exists for the mutual love and support of the spouses and for the procreation and education of children. These two purposes, the unitive and the procreative, are equal and inseparable. The institution of marriage has a very important relationship to the continuation of the human race, to the total development of the human person, and to the dignity, stability, peace, and prosperity of the family and of society.

“Furthermore, we believe the natural institution of marriage has been blessed and elevated by Christ to the dignity of a sacrament. This means that Christian marriage is more than a contract. Because they are married in the Lord, the spouses acquire a special relationship to each other and to society. Their love becomes a living image of the manner in which the Lord personally loves his people and is united with them. Living a Christian sacramental marriage becomes their fundamental way of attaining salvation.”

Up Next on Wednesday: Between Man and Woman (Only)

For full texts of the documents used, see my Marriage Series: Introduction

Marriage Series: Introduction

Many people today walk down the aisle thinking they love the person they are about to marry and hoping they will spend the rest of their life with him or her. This is almost the way it should be. If this were a complete picture, why do as many as fifty percent of marriages end in divorce? Moreover, why are so many people cohabitating instead of getting married?

To answer these questions, we must start at the beginning. I believe that many people today no longer understand the meaning and value of marriage and the family. They do not understand the true, God-given meaning of love. They do not understand the sanctity of the marital act. They may not even understand or believe their marriage vows! How have we gotten to this state? How can we return to God’s way? I hope that you will learn all this and more in the wonderful series, I have put together. I look forward to sharing each post with you!

The topics for the series are:
* An Introduction to Marriage
* Between Man and Woman (Only)
* Soul Mates
* Courtship vs. Dating
* Is “Love” Required for Marriage?
* Chastity before Marriage
* Cohabitation
* Interfaith Marriages
* Engagements
* Prenuptial Agreements
* Getting Married in the Church
* Vows
* “Getting to know each other”
* Marriage is for Children
* The Importance of NFP in Marriage
* True Love … What is Love?
* Raising Children in the Faith
* Theology of the Body and Marriage
* Arguments are Not the End
* In-laws and Family
* Marriage and Money
* Women and the Vocation of Marriage
* The Problem of Divorce
* Some Final Words about Marriage

Just like my last series, I have used a great deal of sources. Instead of linking each source on each post, I have compiled them here for ease of reading. Please read the ones that interest you. They are all Catholic sources and I enjoyed reading them myself!

These are available free online:
* The Holy Bible from New Advent
* Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI
* Mulieris Dignitatem (On the Dignity and Vocation of Women) by Bl. Pope John Paul II
* Familiaris Consortio (The Family in the Modern World) by Bl. Pope John Paul II
* “Letter to Families” by Bl. Pope John Paul II
* “Letter to Women” by Bl. Pope John Paul II
* Family, Marriage, and De Facto Unions by Bl. Pope John Paul II
* “Preparation of the Sacrament of Marriage” from the Vatican
* “Between a Man and Woman Q&A About Same Sex Unions” by USCCB
* “Statement on Same Sex Marriage” by USCCB
* Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan by USCCB
* Married Love and the Gift of Life by USCCB
* Catechism of the Catholic Church on USCCB
* Catechism of the Catholic Church on Knights of Columbus: better for searching
* “Pastoral Letter on Cohabitation” by The Kansas Catholic Conference
* Catholic Dating Guide by Jason E. King
* Preserving the Sanctity of Marriage by Rev. W. Becket Soule, O.P.
* Superstition of Divorce by GK Chesterton
* Divorce versus Democracy by GK Chesterton
* The Defendant by GK Chesterton
* Manalive by GK Chesterton
* Superstition of Divorce Lecture by Dale Ahlquist

These must be purchased:
* Together for Life by Joseph M. Champlin
* “Living Together Before Marriage” by Katrina Zeno and Christopher West
* Theology of the Body for Beginners by Christopher West

Remember to check back here often, as I hope to update this page frequently.

Are We Allowed to Judge Others?

Many people, both Catholics and Protestants alike, tend to take Bible verses out of context to fit their view of how they should live a Christian life. One verse that could not be more “abused” in this sense is Matthew 7:1 “Judge not, that you may not be judged.”

If we read the rest of the passage, we will learn what Jesus actually says.
“2 For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 And why do you see the mote that is in your brother's eye; and see not the beam that is in your own eye? 4 Or how do you say to your brother: Let me cast the mote out of your eye; and behold a beam is in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of your own eye, and then shall you see to cast out the mote out of your brother's eye.” (Matt. 7:2-5)

We see in verse 5 that Jesus tells us, if we first cast out the beam from our own eye, we will then see to cast out the mote from our brother’s eye. This is exactly the opposite of the interpretation given for verse 1: that no one but the Father in heaven can judge anything.

While there is a difference between judging actions and judging people (and I will elaborate on that below), we are called to and must judge the actions of others. If we were not allowed to judge, then no one could say, “Fornication is wrong”, or “Abortion is wrong”, or “Cohabitation is wrong”.

We must be mindful of the problems in judging the person since we may not know their level of culpability for their actions. We cannot know what is truly in their heart and therefore cannot make a blanket statement such as “so-and-so will go to hell for that abortion”. We cannot even know whether Judas is in hell.

However, everyone must judge actions using a properly formed conscience. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church par. 1778, it is said:

“Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law:

“Conscience is a law of the mind; yet [Christians] would not grant that it is nothing more; I mean that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of responsibility, of duty, of a threat and a promise.... [Conscience] is a messenger of him, who, both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by his representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ.”

In addition, CCC 1783 says:

“Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.”

We must also remember that Matt. 7:2, “For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again,” does not mean that if you judge cohabitation as acceptable that you will be judged the same in heaven. As the CCC 1783 says, “Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened” (emphasis added). This means that we must be informed of the Church teachings in order to judge actions correctly.

We must also be mindful that our past sins do not make us unworthy to judge the actions of others. If this were so, how could Peter have been expected to lead the Church as Pope when he denied Christ three times! All humans are sinful, that does not mean that we cannot judge, it only means that we must realize our sins, confess our sins, and grow in our understanding of the Faith in order to lead Christian lives.


* An important ending note: "to admonish sinners" is third of the seven spiritual works of mercy.

Veiling in Church

I mentioned last week that I had felt called to start dressing modestly and femininely with skirts and dresses, and that I had felt called in another area as well—head covering during mass. I want to share with you my research in regards to head covering.

In 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, Paul says:

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you. 3 But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ: and the head of the woman is the man: and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered disgraces his head. 5 But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered disgraces her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven. 6 For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head. 7 The man indeed ought not to cover his head: because he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 For the man was not created for the woman: but the woman for the man. 10 Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels. 11 But yet neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord. 12 For as the woman is of the man, so also is the man by the woman: but all things of God. 13 You yourselves judge. Does it become a woman to pray unto God uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that a man indeed, if he nourish his hair, it is a shame unto him? 15 But if a woman nourish her hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. 16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the Church of God.

The 1917 Code of Canon Law #1262 said:

§1. It is desirable that, consistent with ancient discipline, women be separated from men in church.

§2. Men, in a church or outside a church, while they are assisting at sacred rites, shall be bare-headed, unless the approved mores of the people or peculiar circumstances of things determine otherwise; women, however, shall have a covered head and be modestly dressed, especially when they approach the table of the Lord.

From Catholic Answers, Apologist Peggy Frye says, “[T]he document Inter Insigniores by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (October 15, 1976) stated that the 1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 1262.2) requiring women to wear a veil on their head was a custom of the period, and that such ordinances, “probably inspired by the customs of the period, concern scarcely more than disciplinary practices of minor importance”, thus the “obligation imposed upon women to wear a veil on their head (1 Cor 11:2-16) no longer has a normative value." However, as a sign of respect, women should wear a veil when meeting the pope.”

Showing the Pope respect by covering your head when meeting him, but not showing Christ that same respect at mass does not sit well with me. I admit I do not fully understand the custom to cover your head when meeting the Pope. Nevertheless, I do feel that if it truly is a sign of respect, then we must give Christ that same respect, especially during the Eucharist.

I understand, and would like to mention, that this is a personal devotion for me. It is not binding in conscience upon anyone else. However, if after reading this and researching the Church laws, customs, and scripture on your own, you feel called to cover, go with your heart. Do not let the words of others sway you to believe that head covering is outdated and/or suppressive to women.

Women, Fashions, and the Decline of Society

I now fully understand Chesterton when he writes in What’s Wrong with the World about a reason why women did not need the right to vote. It is because they already rule – they rule the home and therefore society. Women are society’s center. They are the moral standard. What women allow, do, and say will set the tone for all of society. This has been interpreted (from Genesis) as the reason that the serpent went after the woman first. If you want to destroy a society, you must start with the women. Everything else will come down with them.

Bl. Jacinta Marto recalls what Our Blessed Mother spoke to her and the other two children in 1917. “Certain fashions will be introduced which will offend our Lord very much. Persons who serve God must not follow fashions. The Church does not have fashions; Our Lord is always the same. The sins of the world are very great. …”

Women have allowed themselves to become corrupted by the ways of the world. Pants as women’s wear have been around for “so long” that many young girls and women do not think twice about what this says for women as a whole. Giuseppe Cardinal Siri tells us that male dress changes the psychology of women. Male dress tends to vitiate relationships between men and women. And male dress harms the dignity of the mother in her child’s eyes.

Pope Pius XII says this in “Allocution to the Girls of Catholic Action” May 22, 1941:

“Some young ladies may remark that a certain form of dress is more convenient, or even more hygienic; but if it becomes a grave and proximate danger for the soul, it is certainly not hygienic for the spirit, and you must reject it. … And if simply for one’s own pleasure, one has not the right to endanger the physical health of others, is it not still less licit to compromise the health, or rather the very life, of their souls?

“If, as some women say, a bold fashion does not leave them with any evil impressions, how can they know anything of the impression made on others? Who can assure them that others do not draw therefrom incentives to evil? …

“Oh, how truly was it said that if some Christian women could only suspect the temptations and falls they cause in others with modes of dress and familiarity in behavior, which they unthinkingly consider as of no importance, they would be shocked by the responsibility which is theirs.”

All women must understand “the responsibility which is theirs”, mainly, the life of their souls and the souls of others. We must remember that the way we dress, act, and speak represents our femininity, which is beautiful and God-given and must be protected. We must not and do not need to dress and act like men in order to be respected and have equal rights. It is only when we are truly feminine is our dress, words, and actions that we will be given the full respect and dignity due us.

My Path Toward Modesty

Now that I am trying to lead a truly Christian life, with all that encompasses, I cannot believe how I used to dress. I dressed with the fashions of the time: short shorts, short skirts, low-cut tops (sometimes at the same time). One look at my senior pictures from high school will tell all. Given my previous statement, I feel they are too undignified to post here.

As I have grown older (not that I am that old), I have slowly started to become more modest. The biggest changes only started happening when I came back into full communion with the Church. But even then, I hardly gave much of a thought to the way I dress. I figured clothes were clothes. If they are being sold, I can wear them!

About the last eight months or so, I have been feeling very uncomfortable in what I wear. I have noticed that my necklines are too low and constantly felt the need to pull them up. I felt my pants hung too low on my hips, and was always having to pull them up as well. But the more I read and immersed myself in Catholic thought and teaching, the more I felt called to do more.

I finally “gave in” to the yearning of my heart and my husband and I bought me some lovely skirts to wear. I would love to wear dresses but they are impractical right now since I am still nursing. I bought some lovely tops to go along with the skirts. I do not think what I am wearing is “perfect” by any sense, but now I feel content (instead of self-conscious) when I am in public.

The book Dressing with Dignity that I discussed last post really helped me to figure out the why in my question of being called to dress this way. Sometimes we feel a pull from God in one direction of our lives and we are uneasy about following it, wondering where it came from or why we should do this particular thing. I ignored the voice for a while, but I can say that I am truly thankful I finally listened to it.

Next week I will discuss the other area where I have felt a calling.

Dressing with Dignity Review

I put my Chesterton book away for a while and have been reading a few other things. My latest read is called Dressing with Dignity by Colleen Hammond. I think the issue is so important that I will be writing a few posts about it. I will start here with a review of the book.

Hammond incorporates wonderful Catholic sources (popes, saints, scripture, and others) when giving the proper definitions of modesty and noting what the Church has said about fashions. She discusses the history of fashions: unchanged for about 6000 years until the 1900s. However, in the 1900s, things started going downhill rapidly! She also discusses what it means to be feminine. In addition, she uses a whole chapter to discuss proper outfit guidelines.

I think this book is important. It is vital to know what the Church teaches and how the Church has reacted to the changes in clothing in the past hundred years. Before I read this book, I did not know that the Church had made any statements regarding dress!

This book is greatly needed in our world today. I think it should be required reading for every woman and girl. I encourage you to buy the book for yourself and hope that it will change your life and perspective on how to dress like a woman.

The New Marriage Series

This is not my introduction to my new series. It is only an overview and look ahead for everyone to see what is in store!

I feel it is important for me to site Catholic sources with my series. I do not want to write another one like my Back to Nature series where I strictly state my ideas and thoughts. These latest two, Open to Life and now Marriage, are too important not to add Catholic sources.

With that said, I have a great deal of reading in store for me with this series. I have not read all the papal encyclicals about marriage, women, and family. I also have books from Chesterton, Bishops’ letters, and a few Catholic web articles that I plan to read. I hope that my motivation and time management will help me to accomplish this quickly so I can start writing.

If you watched my introduction page for my last series, you saw immense growth in the amount of posts I had. I started with about four posts in mind and the series grew to a total of 22 (including the introduction and closing remarks)! This one is already starting to do the same. I began my thoughts with only the idea of soul mates and it has grown from there. I currently have these posts in mind, but I am hoping to add many more:

* Between a man and woman
* Soul mates
* Courtship vs. dating
* Cohabitation
* Engagements
* Prenuptial agreements
* Vows
* “Getting to know each other”
* Theology of the Body and Marriage
* Arguments
* The importance of NFP
* In-laws and family
* Marriage and money
* Women and the vocation of marriage
* The problems with divorce

As I said previously, I am taking a little time off to move and delve into writing ahead for this series. I plan to post my Marriage Series Introduction in about two weeks.

An Over-Population Rebuttal

Although, I realize this article is long, it is important for understanding the non-existant over-population problem and the Catholic answer to it.

Take a break, and enjoy the article "Planet Un-Parenthood: The Myths of Overpopulation" by Fr. Frank Pavone.

Open to Life: Prophesies in Papal Encyclicals

If you are new to this series, I recommend starting at the beginning: Open to Life Series: What is Openness to Life?


God has naturally ordered all things for reasons that we may not understand, but when we start to interfere with them, evil consequences are automatic. The Church has always known the dangers of not following her teachings. And in 1968 when many people wanted the Church to “change” her teaching on birth control (something impossible for the Church since it does not change any teaching on faith and morals), Pope Paul VI disappointed the masses with his encyclical Humanae Vitae. In it, he prophesied what would happen with the world if it chose artificial methods over God’s plan. All four of his prophesies came true and as chilling as it might seem, many people predicted these same or similar outcomes, because this is the natural order of tampering with God.

In his encyclical, Pope Paul VI wrote:

“Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. [1]Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and [2]a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. [3]Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

“Finally, [4]careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.” (17, emphasis mine)

Will anyone disagree that we have an exponential increase in marital infidelity, a true lowering of all moral standards, disrespect for women and them seen as objects, and governments using birth control to control its people (think China and India)?

The Bishops also draw attention to this in their 2006 letter Married Love and the Gift of Life.

“Many would likely be surprised at how long all Christian churches agreed on this teaching against contraception. It was only in 1930 that some Protestant denominations began to reject this long-held position. Those opposed to this trend predicted an increase in premarital sex, adultery, acceptance of divorce, and abortion. Later, in 1968, Pope Paul VI warned that the use of contraception would allow one spouse to treat the other more like an object than a person, and that in time governments would be tempted to impose laws limiting family size. Pope John Paul II called attention to the close association between contraception and abortion, noting that “the negative values inherent in the ‘contraceptive mentality’ . . . are such that they in fact strengthen this temptation [to abortion] when an unwanted life is conceived” (Evangelium Vitae, 13, emphasis mine).

“These predictions have come true. Today we see a pandemic of sexually transmitted diseases, an enormous rise in cohabitation, one in three children born outside of marriage, and abortion used by many when contraception fails. A failure to respect married love’s power to help create new life has eroded respect for life and for the sanctity of marriage.”

Up Next: Eugenics and Birth Control

For full texts of the documents used, see my Open to Life Series: Introduction

Open to Life: What is Wrong with Fornication?

If you are new to this series, I recommend starting at the beginning: Open to Life Series: What is Openness to Life?


I talked about sex before marriage briefly in my last post: Theology of the Body.

Our society talks about and occasionally even teaches “abstinence”. Although abstinence is called for, without the moral and religious meaning behind it—it is just abstaining, but for what? Society teaches it as a form of “birth control”, but this is not the reason that God made sex solely for marriage! Catholics and some Protestants teach chastity. Although chastity is so much more than waiting until marriage, I am restricting my discussion to that aspect alone.

In The Contraceptive Revolution and Its Fruits, John Bruchalski links fornication to birth control and even abortion.

“To me, the teaching that sexual intercourse is reserved for marriage, that partners in marriage must respect one another, and that marriage involves the total giving of oneself to one's spouse in love, in family life, and in sexual intercourse, is a very powerful and positive teaching. It allows us to be open to life, open to love.

“Its antithesis is the idea that has been adopted by our culture: that individuals have a right to sexual relationships outside of marriage, and that, whether single or married, individuals have a right to sexual intercourse free from any concern that a child might result. Taken one step further, this provides a foundation for the mentality that accepts abortion: if a child results from sexual activity, whether inside or outside marriage, the right not to have to ‘deal’ with that comes into play.” (emphasis original)

Fornication and living together before marriage are wrong. But why? God gave us this supreme act of love so that we could express and image His love. One cannot do this with anyone other than their spouse to whom they have committed their lives and hearts. The Bishops teach, “Sexual intercourse is meant to express the total and unrestricted gift of self that takes place in married love. To have sexual intercourse outside the covenant of marriage is gravely immoral because it communicates physically the gift of oneself to another when, at the same time, one is not willing or able to make a total and permanent commitment” (Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan). Katrina Zeno in “Living Together Before Marriage” uses the same teaching and states, “Pope John Paul II once said that the opposite of love is not to hate another, but to “use” another as an object. When we “take” sexual pleasure from another without “giving” ourselves totally—past, present, and future in a bond of permanent love that is open to new life—we are actually using this person."

Christopher West, in “Living Together Before Marriage”, brings up an important issue. He says,

“If you are having sex with your fiancé now, there’s one thing you know about him or her. He or she is willing to have sex with someone he or she is not married to. … It shouldn’t surprise us in the least that those who are sexually active before marriage have much higher rates of infidelity during marriage. These are the logical consequences of failing to understand the inherently marital meaning of sex.” (emphasis original)

Up Next: Prophesies in Papal Encyclicals

For full texts of the documents used, see my Open to Life Series: Introduction

Open to Life: Theology of the Body

If you are new to this series, I recommend starting at the beginning: Open to Life Series: What is Openness to Life?


Most quotes from this post are from Theology of the Body for Beginners. The numbers in parentheses are page numbers. I thoroughly enjoyed the book both times I read it, but I have to admit, this post is written from my notes I took from the book a few years ago. It is currently packed away in boxes. I wish I had the time to get it out and reread it for this post.

I would like to focus on just a few sections. The whole book is greatly important, and Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body is even more important, but I chose only the most relevant parts to include here.

The first is Spousal Love as Prayer: “The internal goal of every marriage is for the spouses to ensure that what they express subjectively in their sexual union confirms the objective truth of God’s plan. … Simply getting married is not enough to make sexual union something holy and beautiful” (99). Many engaged couples would ask, “What is wrong with having sex now if we’re going to be married in a few weeks (months, etc.)?” Christopher West answers this exact question in “Living Together Before Marriage”. There is no difference. “What you are doing now is not marital and—unless you have a change of heart before the wedding—what you’ll be doing then won’t be marital either” (9). The marital union can only be fully realized the way God intended within marriage and with a pure heart.

The second section is an interesting one. It is entitled Respect for Procreation. On page 104, Christopher West tells us that “even Sigmund Freud recognized [that respect for the procreative function of sexual union is the linchpin of all sexual morality]. In Freud’s book Introductory Lectures in Psychoanalysis he wrote, “Abandonment of the reproductive function is the common feature of all perversions. We actually describe a sexual activity as perverse if it has given up the aim of reproduction and pursues the attainment of pleasure as an aim independent of it.” Even the atheist psychologist understood the importance of openness to life.

I will lump the next two sections together, as they are very similar (“Birth Control” and the Purpose of Contraception). “The Church has always recognized that the only method of ‘birth control’ that respects the language of divine love is ‘self-control’” (111). Chesterton has a similar quote that I shared earlier. To fully understand this, we must realize that the purpose of contraception is not to prevent pregnancy—abstinence was around long before contraception, is 100% effective and 100% safe. “Contraception was invented because of lack of self-control; contraception was invented to serve the indulgence of lust” (113).

The last two sections (Lust and Sex and True Freedom and Sex) are so important. In his book Love and Responsibility, Karol Wojityla (Pope John Paul II) wrote, “If sexual intimacy results from nothing more than lust, it is not love.” This is so true today. Many people do not even know what true love is. I have heard multiple TV show characters that are getting divorced say, “I still love you.” How can you love someone and leave him or her? What does this teach society? I want to finish with a few final quotes from the book:

• “What distinguishes us from the animals? Freedom!”
• “God gave us freedom as the capacity to love. Contraception negates this freedom.”
• “Contraception not only attacks the procreative meaning of sex, ‘it also ceases to be an act of love’ (TOB 123:6). If you cannot say no to sex, what does your ‘yes’ mean?” (emphasis original)
• “Only the person who is free with the freedom for which Christ set us free (see Gal 5:1) is capable of authentic love.”

Up Next: What is Wrong with Fornication?

For full texts of the documents used, see my Open to Life Series: Introduction