"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

Group Demands Dr. Seuss' "Hop on Pop" Too Violent for Kids

This is the kind of complaint that would be funny if it were made to mock other actual complaints. Sadly, this does not seem to be the case.

UPI:

Librarians at the Toronto Public Library were asked to remove copies of Dr. Seuss’ 1963 children's book "Hop on Pop” from the establishment’s collection because it allegedly promotes violence.

A document detailing the seven books the library has been asked to remove over the past year was posted online on Monday.

The book “encourages children to use violence against their fathers,” according to the complaint.

In addition to apologizing to fathers in the Toronto area, the complainant also asked that the library “pay for damages resulting from the book.”

The Materials Review Committee pointed out that the book is “humorous,” “well-loved” and that it has “appeared on many ‘Best of’ children’s book lists.”

The MRC also pointed out that the children in the Pulitzer Prize-winning author’s book are actually told not to hop on pop.

Despite the complaint, the library opted to retain the book in the children's collection.
Good for the library. Standing up to the anti-Seuss hordes.



*subhead*.*subhead*

Your Ad Here

40 comments:

Patrick Archbold said...

I actually let my kids hop on me. Well, the younger ones. They get a kick out of it.

Patrick Archbold said...

Too violent, huh? Wonder if the complainant is pro-choice?

Patrick Archbold said...

NARAL - when ever I see that acronym I think SNARL - as in bared teeth and unbridled hostility. The mental image conjured by either evokes the same gut response.

Patrick Archbold said...

I would have thought it was banned for gender-stereotyping and promoting the patriarchal structure of society by having a man identified as a "pop" or "father."

Patrick Archbold said...

Yet the book clear instructs against the practice of children jumping on their fathers. It reads, "Stop! You must not hop on pop." Elsewhere, the book offers sympathy for fathers, especially those returning from a hard day's labors: "Dad is sad / Very very sad / He had a bad day / What a day Dad had."

Patrick Archbold said...

Lol! Me too! I have a two year old who says "hop pop" and climbs onto my back and holds on while I do pushups (great workout!). Even a two year old knows the difference between "play" hopping on pop and violent hopping on pop.

Patrick Archbold said...

To be fair as far as I can tell the ads that were removed flat out said "Abortion Services" and linked to CPCs. I think that Google has a case where that's a removable ad unfortunately. You can I suppose argue that those who are looking for abortion could find great services at a CPC and in fact find that they would end up not wanting the abortion after all, but that's some shady advertising indeed. It would be like me doing a Google search for rifles and seeing an ad on the side that said "Gun services" and find out that it leads to an anti-gun site that only sells butter knives.

Don't get me wrong I support CPCs but honestly there was some flat out lying going on here.

Patrick Archbold said...

I would be too embarrassed to get rewarded for "damages" my little son inflicted on me while "hopping on pop." Being treated like a jungle gym is just part of being a parent to a toddler.

Patrick Archbold said...

In the evenings I'm re-reading Wordsworth's PRELUDE, which contains bits of insensitive language buried deep within it. I wonder if The Legion of the Perpetually Outraged will ban the Romantic poets?
/
I'm also reading THE BOOK THIEF, and cannot help compare 1930s Nazi book-burning with, well, modern Nazi book-burning.

Patrick Archbold said...

Well, those folks in Toronto must not have gone to Dartmouth. Good for them. My kids and grand kids loved that book and so do I.

Patrick Archbold said...

Patrick Archbold: A vocation to blog is not be set aside, at least you blog. What are your critics doing?

Patrick Archbold said...

Take a hard look at that instruction. It is a mercy to those who cannot truly participate in the liturgy of the mass due to their personal state. Yet, the practice was widespread; according to my mother's experience, in some parishes the average was more than half the congregation. In fact, I've heard a number of traditionalists (including a priest) claim that before Vatican II the laity were *supposed* to pray the rosary during mass, that it was the ideal and preferable to trying to follow along.

If a large chunk of the congregation is praying the rosary during the mass, then either the Church has failed in her liturgy by alienating a large chunk of the people from the "source and summit of Christian worship" to the extent that they need Pius XII's alternative, or the Church has failed to properly catechize the laity that this is a merciful option not a requirement.

Patrick Archbold said...

That is not comforting to me. That tells a story of a laity more obedient to the clergy than the faith. Docility to the Church does not mean blind obedience to the clergy.



It also raises questions about the formation of those clergy. What kind of priests we were forming that they so readily embraced revolution and revision far and away beyond what the documents called for? What kind of priests were we forming that they could go so far off the rails and sabotage parish life so deeply? What kind of priests were we forming that they had so little grasp of the sources of parish vitality.

Patrick Archbold said...

And that is exactly what Pius XII said recitation of the rosary during mass was for, for those times that we cannot actually participate (that is what the Church teaches, *actual* participation, active participation is a poor translation).



And I can sympathize for you, there are many liturgies that I want to just close my eyes, plug my ears, and hum Tantum Ergo in my mind.


My only comfort is focusing on the Eucharist. The liturgy has to go a long way wrong before the Eucharist is no longer there. I use the immensity of the Eucharist to put the banality of many liturgies into perspective. The Eucharist is so immense that the banality pales in comparison.

Patrick Archbold said...

Look at those indicators. The decline of those "Kennedy key indicators" began before Vatican II even concluded, long before the Missal was revised. How can something cause a trend that preceded it?

Also look at those indicators earlier. Through the 50s we saw an unprecedented explosion in those indicators. The Baby Boom and the general worldwide flee to institutions of comfort like religion after WWII and during the Cold War swelled the numbers of sacraments and vocations to levels that had not been seen in the modern world. That bubble was never going to be sustainable.

Patrick Archbold said...

How did they know? Because some of the laity actually studied Latin. My mother went to a convent school where proficiency in Latin was the norm. My uncle was in a seminary high school and was a server where he could hear the priest's "sotto voce." And concern about the validity of the Eucharist due to poor Latin was something you can see expressed at the time by priests and bishops.



I made no claim about the hearts of the congregation, only relayed an observation about their actions. I think you can defend a limited manifestation of the devotion during mass, but not a widespread practice, and dozing was also common and there's no way that can be spun into quiet contemplation.


Looking to the shepherds very well may be the answer, but that explanation only reveals an unhealthy Church. As I said above, docility to the church does not mean blind obedience to your parish priest. A laity more obedient to the clergy than the faith, or a laity too poorly catechized to recognize when they were being led astray by their priests is not the laity of a healthy Church.




Keep in mind, I'm not saying that we have a healthy Church now. I just don't accept the idea that we had a healthy Church and everything was just fine before Vatican II and everything has gone to hell since then.

Patrick Archbold said...

As I've said elsewhere in the thread, that is just as disconcerting to me. That is not what docility to the Church means. And that there weren't enough members of the laity who knew the faith better to make a difference does not say "Golden Age of Catholicism" to me.

Patrick Archbold said...

When I look at the documents of the Church, the documents of Vatican II the actual text of the Pauline Missal, the text of the GIRM, I see only a small proportion of the changes we ended up seeing after Vatican II. It may not have been done by outsiders, but a lot was done in contradiction of Church teaching, not due to it.

Patrick Archbold said...

More and more, I have come to See Vatican II as a lance to a boil in the Church. All that puss was already there, but Vatican II let it all out. Only time will tell whether lancing the boil was the best solution.

Patrick Archbold said...

So how were you parents praying the mass themselves if they were so busy looking around and criticizing everyone else in church? What did they get up and actually walk the aisles and take notes on people? They actually told you that father missed the latin or was incorrect? Did they bring it up to the priest and maybe, since they were Latinists, offer to help him? Maybe those people who were dozing during mass just finished 18 hour hard labor shifts and were making heroic efforts just to be present at mass. My guess is that you're completely full of crap.
And what of it? According to you we've gone from the horror of someone catching a nap in mass to 90% of Catholic women contracepting, half believing abortion is a right, and over half supporting sodomy in marriage. Whatever the problems with the pre-Vatican II discipline at mass, it doesn't compare the universal apostasy we're now witnessing. Get a grip, will you?

Patrick Archbold said...

Right. And those who noticed and complained at the time were cast out or blackballed or sidelined. What's funny is that now they are so sensitive that they want to take three years to phase in some minor changes in wording....

Patrick Archbold said...

Not my experience, from 1952 first communion to adulthood. In every parish, Pius XII's liturgical reform was underway. Everyone had Missals and there were dialog Masses in Latin....what the "traditionalists" are doing today as the Mass of 1962 is not at all like 1962, but more like 1922!

Patrick Archbold said...

Paul VI should not have forbidden the Mass in use for centuries. They could have co-existed.

Patrick Archbold said...

I wonder how happy google is with narals statement that there are "other search engines."

Patrick Archbold said...

I'll bet google was happy to see naral's mention that there are "other search engines."

Patrick Archbold said...

So you'd just prefer the lesser of two evils? I'd prefer the holiness to which we are called by Jesus. I'd prefer that our goal were a Church of saints, not just a Church that clears the hurdle of widespread contraception, abortion, sexual idiocy and apostasy.

Just saying "It was so much better then" is a pointless statement. I've never argued that we are better off now than before Vatican II. I've only argued that we weren't exactly in great place before Vatican II, that the seeds of our decline had already been planted, and that a return to a pre-Vatican II Church isn't going to give us a new Golden Era.

If we are to plot our path forward as a Church, a path of fidelity to Jesus and the Truth of the Catholic Faith, we have to be honest about where we are today and where we were yesterday. Personally, I think the situation on the ground is worse now than it was before Vatican II, but that the path to a more healthy future is more open. A healthy love of both Tradition and tradition is a necessary part of treading that path, but a rosy nostalgia for the past is just going to lead us astray.

Patrick Archbold said...

Yeah.... and heteronormative too...

Patrick Archbold said...

I agree with the points you make here, but I wouldn't call the pre-Vatican II Church the lesser of two evils. It was a Church in continuity with the past that could have grown organically over time to a more perfect holiness. The problems you mention in your first post were eminently fixable without a completely dumbed-down ecumenism-centered makeover the liturgy (did you know that Protestants were consulted and played a large part in the creation out of thin air of the Mass of Paul VI?)
What do you do when you make a wrong turn when you're driving? Do you just go on in the wrong direction, or do you go back to the point where you know you were on the right road? No, things weren't perfect and there is plenty of blame to go around for the mess we're in. But trying to move forward from where we are now without acknowledging the grievous errors we've fallen into is madness.

Patrick Archbold said...

After Vatican II, everything just seemed to fall apart. I was 22 and saw
Priests and Nuns leaving our churches and schools, sometimes hand in hand whereupon they set up housekeeping within the very same area where once they taught. Our Holy Mass was transmogrified
to unbelievable spectacles of performance art. At 25, I stood up at one of these so called masses and walked out. That morning 152 people did the same. Some of the people I saw around me in the parking lot were the same age as I am now, 74 years old. Those poor people were crying. At first I thought from rage but now I know that they knew they would never, ever see that beautiful extraordinary Tridentine Mass again. The Church did what every conqueror in History did. First they took our Language as a people. Latin identified us as catholic more than any other thing. They they gave no time to adjust and were ridiculing any who dared to defend it. 3 years ago a friend asked if i wanted to see a latin mass. It was at a nearby TRCC church. They went into schism in the Netherlands in 1870 ever the matter of infallibility. Today they recognize the primacy of the Pope and are at least in the Netherlands a prelature. It was the first time in 46 years I saw a mass no different from those I went to almost daily in my youth. I will never give up a chance to participate in this my birthright as a Catholic. No person could attend that service done so reverently and with such evident worship and not weep at what Vatican II has done to all of us. I am Roman Catholic until I die.
Popes come and go. Our Hierarchy is rife with actively practicing
homosexuals and nothing is done about it. I will keep the catechism, the deposit of Faith handed down to us,and practice every single rule Old Traditional Catholics keep. 4 years ago I went to confession and once more attended mass. It has become hell to attend the Novus Ordo Mass.
I go to comfort Jesus in the tabernacle while people talk loudly across the aisles, read their e-mails, and chldren race around the church. I read the Mass from the Old St Joseph Missal. Christ is still there I'll never walk out on him again. I now attend 2 services on Sunday. I 'm not giving up Christ or his Tridentine Mass. If Rome has a problem with that I place my faith in Christ the Head of the One Holy Roman catholic Church.

Patrick Archbold said...

Thank goodness someone is finally advocating for me. I have been an abused father ever since my first son could walk. For years I have been kept down and oppressed by the majority class in this house. And its all those librarians' fault! And docter Seuss too. All his child-centric books should be banned.

Patrick Archbold said...

Yesssuuureeee,
Google has teamed up and is in bed with the dishonest, naral abortion pimps!
Politically connected naral members, in the past, have been caught lying, misrepresenting their platform and have used questionable tactics in local political elections.
So have your say, and do it now, because, google and the baby haters have hooked up and are trying to shut down free speech on the internet!
They just bought a new bff! How influential! They are at the power peddling game, "again"!

Naral is such a dishonest, underhanded, loathsome entity. Where "do" they get off demanding anything of anybody. Like, these back alley, coat hanger waving hacks, have standards or something. Really?

Patrick Archbold said...

Hey I only found your blog about 6 months ago, so you never stop reaching more people!

Patrick Archbold said...

Born in 1937, I grew up in a time with no liberals, no conservatives, no reformists, no Traditionalists, no socialists, just plain Roman Catholics. We believed what we were taught. We were taught what the Church taught. No questions asked. Nothing to ask. This was Holy Mother Church, the Barque of the Church and Peter was at the helm.
And THEN
Vatican II, we trusted as we always had. Nothing to complain about.
And THEN
Active Participation, I used to notice little old ladies saying the rosary during Mass and would wonder "why don't they follow the readings? They can say their rosaries at home or before/after Mass." So I thought Active Participation must be a good thing to teach. Little did I know what "active participation" would become.
And THEN
Time (maybe it was Life) Magazine with an article interviewing a priest: "A priest looks at his outdated Church" What a scandal, a priest criticizing the Church? Little could I dream what "open windows" would become.
And THEN
Modified habits for nuns and modified clerical wear. As was explained at the time: Those poor Benedictine (I believe it was Benedictine) nuns who wore such starched wimples that extended beyond faces and made driving dangerous. Those poor priests in outlaying districts, traveling on bicycles, whose cassocks could get caught in the bicycle chains. Modified habits would be good. Little could I dream what "modified habits" would become.
And THEN
Indults. Communion in the hand was supposed to be an induct, but some parishes teach children it is the norm as if Communion on the Tongue was the Indult. And "they" wonder why belief and respect for the Blessed Sacrament has declined.
Mayhem, mayhem, has ensued.
I pray daily that God will intervene and am fearful for when he will, for THEN, His Intervention will be interpreted as "mayhem".

Patrick Archbold said...

More than a year after the beginning of the disastrous “Francesco” papacy, I’m still waiting for an apology from our allegedly “humble pope” for his numerous, totally uncharitable and completely uncalled for slights against conservative Catholics.

This, followed by Sunday’s politically calculated, dual canonization of Popes John XXIII and John Paul II. And now today, the pope’s personal teaching on the Gift of Understanding – as if the Holy Spirit was actually directing his bumbling last twelve months, for the greater good.

Holy Father, many conservative Catholics have long ago learned to rightly utilize the gifts of the Holy Spirit. We see and comprehend what you are doing, and in response can only pray and respectfully protest, since the Church of faith and reason, which used to be infallibly guided by the Holy Paraclete, appears to have been successfully hijacked by the likes of you and yours – and there’s no telling where that might eventually lead.

Patrick Archbold said...

I agree. You should be careful about banning people though. It seems our whole country, after defeating communism, wants to take on their methods.
Of course, your faithfulness to God comes first, but he might want you to get dirty and argue with the dissenters rather than ban them.
It wasn't only the leftists who got us here, it was also the orthodox who were too lazy to defend orthodoxy and just tried to ban the heterodox instead.

Patrick Archbold said...

Jay, what you said.

Patrick Archbold said...

I think we're in this - hopefully at the tail end of it: http://www.michaeljournal.org/visionleo.asp
Wait it out and keep going, Matt. Wait and pray it out and stay with it. Let's be the ones standing when the door gets slammed on Satan and all his...evil.

Patrick Archbold said...

I am so blessed I was born in 1950 and I'm old enough to have lived through Vatican II. I know first hand what a blessing the Council was. I was warned many times times that it would take years to see the fruits of the Council. At least I don't have to live through the Latin Mass abuse anymore. I'm Happy that Big Hats are not in style!

Patrick Archbold said...

The instruction does not say that those who pray the rosary or some other devotional prayer cannot "truly participate" in the liturgy; it offers these methods as a means for participating in the liturgy by praying prayers in harmony with it.

Further, it notes that "Moreover, the needs and inclinations of all are not the same, nor are they always constant in the same individual" which means that at one Mass a man may desire to follow along in a missal, at another he may be inclined to offer up devotional prayers or even his own silent prayers. All are legitimate means of participating at Mass and sharing its fruits.



Nowhere does the instruction give the hint that where these people participate in the Mass in such a way that the liturgy has "failed" or that they are alienated from the liturgy. Actually quite the opposite.

Patrick Archbold said...

Open letter to google,

Just reminding.
To many, the naral brand arouses an imagery of absolute, utter disgust!
They are the "threatening" hand that waves the rusty, wire coat hanger.
In their militancy, they made it their "unintentional" logo. Those horrific images don't go away easily, especially for a shocked little girl who remembers their hate filled, rhetorical protests!
More than their label, they are vulgar, nasty and crude! For those of us, that can remember their beginnings. Disdain, dislike and gross physical discomfort are such understatements!

Post a Comment