- Well, the first Remnant piece went over QUITE well. And, like clockwork, here comes this news, which just proves my point EXACTLY:
- The best feedback on the Remnant piece, “Go Clean Up the Kitchen, You Stupid, Stupid Woman” was the lady who said that HER CHILDREN are her “compensation” (yep – the notion of a woman actually loving her children is SQUIRMWORTHY in this sick, depraved culture), and this: This is excellent. Thank you, Ann. As happy as it makes me to cook and clean for my family, I think it makes my husband even happier. For my birthday last year he gave me the following quote in a lovely frame: “There is no spectacle on earth more appealing than that of a beautiful woman in the act of cooking dinner for someone she loves.” It hangs in my kitchen, where I can see it as I’m cooking.Yeah, you should DEFINITELY keep him around. Spectacular!
3. In terms of The Remnant Newspaper, they have great content, are doing yeoman’s work, and their subscription rate is very low. If you want to help support them, the ANNUAL subscription cost is a whopping $40. Not $40 per month – no – $40 per year. $3.33 per month. Although I think it is billed all at once because it is such a low price.
Here is the link to their subscription page if you would like to help them out.
4. From the Mailbag:
Regarding the [birth control] PILL. My son has Autism. It’s not a happy-go-lucky disability. It’s a gut wrenching slog where I have to paint and patch EVERY wall in my house before I can sell it. Because my son banged his head bloody on every one of them. I had him in the Emergency Room 3 times in a month for stitches before I decided not to keep him in the local reeducation camps. I know I’m slow. A Convert with a prior vasectomy, I am appalled by this man’s [Bergoglio’s] words.
My son who struggles more in a day than perhaps I ever have may well be the best blessing I have ever had. He teaches me every day how Our Father must feel watching us continue to bang our head against the same walls ALL the time.
5. This is more of a thinking-out-loud/question. So I was sitting in church the other day, and I was thinking about weird things, as one does. With all of this Francis heresy crap trying to ratify contraception, I had read a lot about Natural Family Planning over the past week or so. For those of you who don’t know, NFP is an iffy thing in the Church that basically says that married couples can use observable physiological changes in the wife’s downstairs plumbing over the 28 day cycle to ascertain potential fertile days, and then either abstain from the marital embrace, or be sure to engage in the marital embrace, depending on whether or not the married couple wants to conceive.
I think ALL Novus Ordo converts are taught this in RCIA. I was. And it has some pretty significant problems. The Church fathers all the way down until… wait for it… the mid-20th Century were adamant the the marital embrace had to be totally, completely open to life (and yes, this includes post-menopausal women, because remember, two of the most important people in Salvation History, Isaac and John the Baptist, were born to post-menpausal women).
I was looking at an NFP chart, and noticed that the days of menstruation are the days specifically designated “infertile”. Every other day has at least a very small chance of being fertile. Ovaries are tricky.
Anyway, so that got me thinking about the Old Testament prohibition against marital relations during menstruation and all that. Now, I fully realize that this has something to do with sanitation, and that there isn’t really a sanitation problem where there is clean running water and people are showering daily if not more frequently if necessary.
BUT, and here is my question for any theologians who might be out there reading, COULD IT BE POSSIBLE that God in His omniscience originally forbad the marital embrace during menstruation because He knew that people would, in an attempt to contracept “naturally”, especially in today’s age, have marital relations during the wife’s period, which is obviously almost certainly infertile, and then abstain for the rest of the month?
I have a philosopher friend who can explain why the primary end of the marital embrace is EXCLUSIVELY the transmission of life, and secondarily – VERY secondarily – the unitive aspect for the couple, and why the whole John Paul II Theology of the Body TOTALLY messes all of that up, because it puts the unitive aspect on equal if not a superior plane as reproduction. And then you end up with massive scandals like Christopher West’s oeuvre of soft porn books on “Catholic sex”, and a woman who had an affair and child with a priest writing a book on Theology of the Body. The slope is slippery and it all gets VERY diabolical VERY quickly. I need to consult with my philosopher friend and write the layman’s explanation up, because it is very important, and Bergoglio’s heresy has made it front page news.
But anyway, I thought it was an interesting question. Remember, NOTHING in the Old Testament is just random. All of those laws had a firm purpose and mean something.