Would it be wrong to be around them?

[John Lamb]

One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Or like celibate priests talking about sex, or marriage, or parenting.

[coffeeandcigarette]

One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Or like celibate priests talking about sex, or marriage, or parenting.

I know you are kidding, but this is such an important point. It is not like this at all. If this was a matter of educating parents about doctrine, pointing out rules and church guidelines, that would be one thing; but this isn't about that. This is subjective and based on your own knowledge of your child, the particular influence of the grandparent, etc.

About your previous point: You are right, we are not ultimately responsible, insofar as they have to keep the faith on their own steam. However, that comes into effect much more are they age. When they are 5, 8, 9, etc; you are much more responsible. The parent is also responsible for all the influences we have allowed for our children. Anything outside our knowledge or control is one thing, but putting our children directly in the path and under the influence (especially overnight) of certain people is something we will absolutely answer for.

[christulsa]

I'm perfectly calm lady, climb down off your high horse.  Your premise is just patently absurd and not Catholic.  One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.   Childless traditional Catholic couples aren't sitting "comfy on the sidelines until we have something well informed to add to the conversation."   Quite the contrary.  My wife was also once a physical therapist caring for disabled children, and my past career was teaching and coaching children.  And that work most definitely includes the spiritual dimension of "caring for souls" especially in giving moral guidance and spiritual support.   No it's not parenting per se, but definitely very similar.  Take it or leave it.

You can have the last word, I don't have time for long toxic "arguments."

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Ridiculous statement considering you have described yourself even recently as struggling with being overweight, yet frequently counsel to lift weights and get in shape.   The irony of the above statement.  Your advise to others about fitness is OK in my book, still being overweight, even though you object to the childless giving their opinion about bunker trad parents.  Which you asked for, for goodness sakes. As if they are akin to fat people giving out nutrition/exercise advise.   Listen to yourself.  Heck by your internal logic, the laity shouldn't even be raising criticism about priests, bishops, or the pope unless you know they are a priest, bishop, or the pope.   Tiresome.

[coffeeandcigarette]

I'm perfectly calm lady, climb down off your high horse.  Your premise is just patently absurd and not Catholic.  One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.   Childless traditional Catholic couples aren't sitting "comfy on the sidelines until we have something well informed to add to the conversation."   Quite the contrary.  My wife was also once a physical therapist caring for disabled children, and my past career was teaching and coaching children.  And that work most definitely includes the spiritual dimension of "caring for souls" especially in giving moral guidance and spiritual support.   No it's not parenting per se, but definitely very similar.  Take it or leave it.

You can have the last word, I don't have time for long toxic "arguments."

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Ridiculous statement considering you have described yourself even recently as struggling with being overweight, yet frequently counsel to lift weights and get in shape.   The irony of the above statement.  Your advise to others about fitness is OK in my book, still being overweight, even though you object to the childless giving their opinion about bunker trad parents.  Which you asked for, for goodness sakes. As if they are akin to fat people giving out nutrition/exercise advise.   Listen to yourself.  Heck by your internal logic, the laity shouldn't even be raising criticism about priests, bishops, or the pope unless you know they are a priest, bishop, or the pope.   Tiresome.

*sigh*

This is my entire point Chris. Weight, doctrine, Church tradition, etc...these things are very objective. There are canon laws and codes and writings all telling us exactly what to believe and practice. Telling someone to lift weights and diet is basic information which you can find in any healthy manual anywhere. Repeating objective truths takes no experience whatsoever.

When it comes to completely subjective things, like the degree of intimacy with a grandparent, directly based on their practice of the faith or goodwill towards to faith, you need more. In this particular case, you need to actual be responsible for another soul to understand the duty and responsibility which drives a person to make such decisions.

[awkwardcustomer]

I'm perfectly calm lady, climb down off your high horse.  Your premise is just patently absurd and not Catholic.  One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.   Childless traditional Catholic couples aren't sitting "comfy on the sidelines until we have something well informed to add to the conversation."   Quite the contrary.  My wife was also once a physical therapist caring for disabled children, and my past career was teaching and coaching children.  And that work most definitely includes the spiritual dimension of "caring for souls" especially in giving moral guidance and spiritual support.   No it's not parenting per se, but definitely very similar.  Take it or leave it.

You can have the last word, I don't have time for long toxic "arguments."

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Ridiculous statement considering you have described yourself even recently as struggling with being overweight, yet frequently counsel to lift weights and get in shape.   The irony of the above statement.  Your advise to others about fitness is OK in my book, still being overweight, even though you object to the childless giving their opinion about bunker trad parents.  Which you asked for, for goodness sakes. As if they are akin to fat people giving out nutrition/exercise advise.   Listen to yourself.  Heck by your internal logic, the laity shouldn't even be raising criticism about priests, bishops, or the pope unless you know they are a priest, bishop, or the pope.   Tiresome.

*sigh*

This is my entire point Chris. Weight, doctrine, Church tradition, etc...these things are very objective. There are canon laws and codes and writings all telling us exactly what to believe and practice. Telling someone to lift weights and diet is basic information which you can find in any healthy manual anywhere. Repeating objective truths takes no experience whatsoever.

When it comes to completely subjective things, like the degree of intimacy with a grandparent, directly based on their practice of the faith or goodwill towards to faith, you need more. In this particular case, you need to actual be responsible for another soul to understand the duty and responsibility which drives a person to make such decisions.

Yes, and who would argue with what you've said here? 

But having re-read it twice, Christulsa's original post stayed within these bounds and yet you were unbelievably rude going on vicious to him, IMO. 

And that's the problem - you and the appalling attitude you've displayed here.  You can post as many comments as you like in an attempt to prove how reasonable you are.  But you seem to have no conception at all of how you come across.

And as for the foul comments you've made to me, I trust you wouldn't be so foolish as to speak to me like that in person. 

Nasty you are.

[coffeeandcigarette]

I'm perfectly calm lady, climb down off your high horse.  Your premise is just patently absurd and not Catholic.  One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.   Childless traditional Catholic couples aren't sitting "comfy on the sidelines until we have something well informed to add to the conversation."   Quite the contrary.  My wife was also once a physical therapist caring for disabled children, and my past career was teaching and coaching children.  And that work most definitely includes the spiritual dimension of "caring for souls" especially in giving moral guidance and spiritual support.   No it's not parenting per se, but definitely very similar.  Take it or leave it.

You can have the last word, I don't have time for long toxic "arguments."

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Ridiculous statement considering you have described yourself even recently as struggling with being overweight, yet frequently counsel to lift weights and get in shape.   The irony of the above statement.  Your advise to others about fitness is OK in my book, still being overweight, even though you object to the childless giving their opinion about bunker trad parents.  Which you asked for, for goodness sakes. As if they are akin to fat people giving out nutrition/exercise advise.   Listen to yourself.  Heck by your internal logic, the laity shouldn't even be raising criticism about priests, bishops, or the pope unless you know they are a priest, bishop, or the pope.   Tiresome.

*sigh*

This is my entire point Chris. Weight, doctrine, Church tradition, etc...these things are very objective. There are canon laws and codes and writings all telling us exactly what to believe and practice. Telling someone to lift weights and diet is basic information which you can find in any healthy manual anywhere. Repeating objective truths takes no experience whatsoever.

When it comes to completely subjective things, like the degree of intimacy with a grandparent, directly based on their practice of the faith or goodwill towards to faith, you need more. In this particular case, you need to actual be responsible for another soul to understand the duty and responsibility which drives a person to make such decisions.

Yes, and who would argue with what you've said here? 

But having re-read it twice, Christulsa's original post stayed within these bounds and yet you were unbelievably rude going on vicious to him, IMO. 

And that's the problem - you and the appalling attitude you've displayed here.  You can post as many comments as you like in an attempt to prove how reasonable you are.  But you seem to have no conception at all of how you come across.

And as for the foul comments you've made to me, I trust you wouldn't be so foolish as to speak to me like that in person. 

Nasty you are.

I said you don't have children. That is a fact and I would certainly say it in person.

I said you don't understand what it is like to be a mother, again, would say this in person.

I said you have made a pedestal for yourself as a person who has given "all their love to God," in comparison to parents, who in your opinion have not. I would certainly say this in person.

As to any other comments made by me on your opinions or previous statements, a brief perusal of your forum history will prove the accuracy of my statements. If called upon to prove this in person, I certainly would. You are very wrong if you think I get all emotional and wimpy in person and refuse to speak the truth. That is not the case.

[awkwardcustomer]

I'm perfectly calm lady, climb down off your high horse.  Your premise is just patently absurd and not Catholic.  One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.   Childless traditional Catholic couples aren't sitting "comfy on the sidelines until we have something well informed to add to the conversation."   Quite the contrary.  My wife was also once a physical therapist caring for disabled children, and my past career was teaching and coaching children.  And that work most definitely includes the spiritual dimension of "caring for souls" especially in giving moral guidance and spiritual support.   No it's not parenting per se, but definitely very similar.  Take it or leave it.

You can have the last word, I don't have time for long toxic "arguments."

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Ridiculous statement considering you have described yourself even recently as struggling with being overweight, yet frequently counsel to lift weights and get in shape.   The irony of the above statement.  Your advise to others about fitness is OK in my book, still being overweight, even though you object to the childless giving their opinion about bunker trad parents.  Which you asked for, for goodness sakes. As if they are akin to fat people giving out nutrition/exercise advise.   Listen to yourself.  Heck by your internal logic, the laity shouldn't even be raising criticism about priests, bishops, or the pope unless you know they are a priest, bishop, or the pope.   Tiresome.

*sigh*

This is my entire point Chris. Weight, doctrine, Church tradition, etc...these things are very objective. There are canon laws and codes and writings all telling us exactly what to believe and practice. Telling someone to lift weights and diet is basic information which you can find in any healthy manual anywhere. Repeating objective truths takes no experience whatsoever.

When it comes to completely subjective things, like the degree of intimacy with a grandparent, directly based on their practice of the faith or goodwill towards to faith, you need more. In this particular case, you need to actual be responsible for another soul to understand the duty and responsibility which drives a person to make such decisions.

Yes, and who would argue with what you've said here? 

But having re-read it twice, Christulsa's original post stayed within these bounds and yet you were unbelievably rude going on vicious to him, IMO. 

And that's the problem - you and the appalling attitude you've displayed here.  You can post as many comments as you like in an attempt to prove how reasonable you are.  But you seem to have no conception at all of how you come across.

And as for the foul comments you've made to me, I trust you wouldn't be so foolish as to speak to me like that in person. 

Nasty you are.

I said you don't have children. That is a fact and I would certainly say it in person.

I said you don't understand what it is like to be a mother, again, would say this in person.

I said you have made a pedestal for yourself as a person who has given "all their love to God," in comparison to parents, who in your opinion have not. I would certainly say this in person.

As to any other comments made by me on your opinions or previous statements, a brief perusal of your forum history will prove the accuracy of my statements. If called upon to prove this in person, I certainly would. You are very wrong if you think I get all emotional and wimpy in person and refuse to speak the truth. That is not the case.

Perhaps you don't realise how nasty you are.  Is that it?  Is it a genuine oversight?

Or do you wilfully refuse to accept the objections of others to your comments?  Your repeated attempts at self-justification suggest the latter. 

But whether you are unaware or unrepentant, if you spoke to me in person the way you have spoken to me here, you would regret it.

You insisted earlier that you have no bad attitude and that you are just being honest and speaking facts.  Self-reflection doesn't seem to be your strong point.

Perhaps you need to spend more time alone with Christ.

[John Lamb]

It looks to me that c&g has put a lot of pressure on herself as a parent; the general thrust of her argument is that parents are responsible for the eternal salvation of their children, so the parents cannot allow anything that would threaten that; and she fears her own judgment should she fail in this respect.

In my opinion, this attitude can easily exaggerate the parents' responsibility, and lead to an over-protective attitude. It's this over-protective attitude among some Trads that Graham and others have identified as a problem. I think the blame for this resets largely on traditional priests for scaring the parents into thinking, more or less, that if their children were to lapse it would be their fault; and not only would their children go to hell, but they would too for failing in their parental responsibility. This is too much pressure and too much fear being handed down to the parents, which in turn will be handed down to the children, which inadvertently might cause problems detrimental to faith, since faith should be supported by love not fear.

In cases like Gardener's where his mother is clearly unstable and has a personal vendetta against the faith, it's quite reasonable if not obvious that he should be on guard. It seems his mother feels personally insulted by some of the Catholic Church's teachings, so she needs patience and compassion, but she shouldn't use Gardener's children as a means to carry out some form of petty vengeance against the Church.

But I agree with Graham and others that merely being Protestant is not of itself sufficient to remove your children from the company of your grandparents. It's an opportunity for your children to learn about personal boundaries, religious divisions and differences of culture and opinion, and loving people of other faiths / traditions. It's all important to growing up in today's world, and shielding your children from it too much out of fear of corruption might have the opposite result of making your child's faith weaker by couching it in fear and avoidance. I think one of the biggest flaws of Traditionalism is that it's so focused on polemics against the modern world and modern corruption, that it can induce that fearful bunker mentality which is very opposed to a healthy Christian one. The first disciples did not fear the world's corruption or hide from it; but yes of course they didn't allow themselves or their children to become infected by it. It's a matter of balance that can only be achieved by sincere faith and trust in God.

[queen.saints]

Just started listening to Proverbs on audio during the day (at the advice of a Protestant, no less) because it's one of the best resources for parents as it is a father and mother speaking to a son.

It's striking just how many times the word "FEAR" is used. The single most important driving message is to teach your children to fear both the Lord and the terrible consequences of their sins both in this life and the next.

The foolish man who gets caught by the harlot, did so because he walked near her house. Stay away from bad situations. My dad told us this when we were little. He said everyone knows the first verse to "The Spider and The Fly" and thinks the fly is clever and gets away, but actually the poem ends with the fly going back to the spider and getting caught. The real moral is that once you speak with evil you have already lost.

Will you walk into my parlour?" said the Spider to the Fly,
"'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy;
The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
And I've a many curious things to shew when you are there."
"Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "to ask me is in vain,
For who goes up your winding stair can ne'er come down again."

"I'm sure you must be weary, dear, with soaring up so high;
Will you rest upon my little bed?" said the Spider to the Fly.
"There are pretty curtains drawn around; the sheets are fine and thin,
And if you like to rest awhile, I'll snugly tuck you in!"
"Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "for I've often heard it said,
They never, never wake again, who sleep upon your bed!"

Said the cunning Spider to the Fly, "Dear friend what can I do,
To prove the warm affection I've always felt for you?
I have within my pantry, good store of all that's nice;
I'm sure you're very welcome–will you please to take a slice?"
"Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "kind sir, that cannot be,
I've heard what's in your pantry, and I do not wish to see!"

"Sweet creature!" said the Spider, "you're witty and you're wise,
How handsome are your gauzy wings, how brilliant are your eyes!
I've a little looking-glass upon my parlour shelf,
If you'll step in one moment, dear, you shall behold yourself."
"I thank you, gentle sir," she said, "for what you're pleased to say,
And bidding you good morning now, I'll call another day."

The Spider turned him round about, and went into his den,
For well he knew the silly Fly would soon come back again:
So he wove a subtle web, in a little corner sly,
And set his table ready, to dine upon the Fly.
Then he came out to his door again, and merrily did sing,
"Come hither, hither, pretty Fly, with the pearl and silver wing;
Your robes are green and purple–there's a crest upon your head;
Your eyes are like the diamond bright, but mine are dull as lead!"

Alas, alas! how very soon this silly little Fly,
Hearing his wily, flattering words, came slowly flitting by;
With buzzing wings she hung aloft, then near and nearer drew,
Thinking only of her brilliant eyes, and green and purple hue–
Thinking only of her crested head–poor foolish thing! At last,
Up jumped the cunning Spider, and fiercely held her fast.
He dragged her up his winding stair, into his dismal den,
Within his little parlour–but she ne'er came out again!

And now dear little children, who may this story read,
To idle, silly flattering words, I pray you ne'er give heed:
Unto an evil counsellor, close heart and ear and eye,
And take a lesson from this tale, of the Spider and the Fly.

[Heinrich]

I'm perfectly calm lady, climb down off your high horse.  Your premise is just patently absurd and not Catholic.  One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.   Childless traditional Catholic couples aren't sitting "comfy on the sidelines until we have something well informed to add to the conversation."   Quite the contrary.  My wife was also once a physical therapist caring for disabled children, and my past career was teaching and coaching children.  And that work most definitely includes the spiritual dimension of "caring for souls" especially in giving moral guidance and spiritual support.   No it's not parenting per se, but definitely very similar.  Take it or leave it.

You can have the last word, I don't have time for long toxic "arguments."

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Ridiculous statement considering you have described yourself even recently as struggling with being overweight, yet frequently counsel to lift weights and get in shape.   The irony of the above statement.  Your advise to others about fitness is OK in my book, still being overweight, even though you object to the childless giving their opinion about bunker trad parents.  Which you asked for, for goodness sakes. As if they are akin to fat people giving out nutrition/exercise advise.   Listen to yourself.  Heck by your internal logic, the laity shouldn't even be raising criticism about priests, bishops, or the pope unless you know they are a priest, bishop, or the pope.   Tiresome.

I do not routinely tell people to lift weights and get in shape. I have developed an online shtick for sure in regards to pumping iron, no argument there. My self deprecation in Live's lament was with a dash of the hyperbolic.  "Bunker trad?"  Insulting to pious parents. You sound like Mark Shea.

[Jayne]

[...]
And now dear little children, who may this story read,
To idle, silly flattering words, I pray you ne'er give heed:
Unto an evil counsellor, close heart and ear and eye,
And take a lesson from this tale, of the Spider and the Fly.

It reminds me of the White Witch in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe.  That is a great book for spiritual lessons for children.  (It actually played a role in my conversion.  I fell in love with Aslan years before I understood that he represented Jesus.)

[Jayne]

A point about formatting:  Replying by interspersing comments in an alternate font throughout a post can be very confusing for readers.  This is especially so after being quoted.

There are instructions for another method here: https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=23949.msg502508

[christulsa]

I'm perfectly calm lady, climb down off your high horse.  Your premise is just patently absurd and not Catholic.  One does not need to be a parent to know Catholic teaching on duties to parents or on parenting, or to advise on those subjects.   Childless traditional Catholic couples aren't sitting "comfy on the sidelines until we have something well informed to add to the conversation."   Quite the contrary.  My wife was also once a physical therapist caring for disabled children, and my past career was teaching and coaching children.  And that work most definitely includes the spiritual dimension of "caring for souls" especially in giving moral guidance and spiritual support.   No it's not parenting per se, but definitely very similar.  Take it or leave it.

You can have the last word, I don't have time for long toxic "arguments."

I disagree with this. It is akin to fat people giving diet and exercise advice.

Ridiculous statement considering you have described yourself even recently as struggling with being overweight, yet frequently counsel to lift weights and get in shape.   The irony of the above statement.  Your advise to others about fitness is OK in my book, still being overweight, even though you object to the childless giving their opinion about bunker trad parents.  Which you asked for, for goodness sakes. As if they are akin to fat people giving out nutrition/exercise advise.   Listen to yourself.  Heck by your internal logic, the laity shouldn't even be raising criticism about priests, bishops, or the pope unless you know they are a priest, bishop, or the pope.   Tiresome.

I do not routinely tell people to lift weights and get in shape. I have developed an online shtick for sure in regards to pumping iron, no argument there. My self deprecation in Live's lament was with a dash of the hyperbolic.  "Bunker trad?"  Insulting to pious parents. You sound like Mark Shea.

Sure you do.  You routinely challenge guys here to lift to improve themselves, including physically.  Nothing wrong with that, even if your current BMI would clinically classify you as overweight or obese.  But your analogy is stupid.  Married but childless trads offering advise or opinion on parenting and relations with extended family  (which you asked me for earlier on this thread) IS NOT "akin to fat people advising about diet and nutrition."   Your Beavis and Butthead shtick isn't helping anyone, only amusing yourself.   

And you entirely miss the point.   The term "bunker trad" is frequently used in the trad movement by trads themselves to refer to the extremists in its ranks who act like isolationist nutters.  A "trad" is a Catholic practicing the Faith in accord with Tradition, especially in accord with Traditional Doctrine and Liturgy.  Period.  Whereas a "bunker trad" is one who in practice treats the Faith as a private gnostic philosophy for a tiny elitist elect separated in isolation from non-trads.  Plenty of people in either category.  And it's not hard to spot the bunker trad nutters.  They're usually arrogant and bitter.

[Stu Cool]

I appreciate Gardener's replies.  I am essentially in the same boat.  My parents and my mother in law live within 3 miles of me.  I am not sure too many people nowadays will be able to enjoy that.  In case of my wife and my death, our will stipulates that our children would go to my mother-in-law.  In case she is unable, then our children will go to the godparent's of our first child.  They are solidly orthodox Novus Ordo (though occasionally go to the TLM) but they also take similar steps but in relation to his sister and family.  He won't leave his children alone with them.  We are the same with my brother-in-law's daughter (my children's cousin).  I think a lot of this (Gardener, my case, and our friend's case) deals with the age of our children.  My children are 7, 5, 3, 1 while i know Gardener's are younger and our friend's are in the same age category.  They are quite impressionable at this point and can remember some of the darnedest things.  That is why we are hesitate on exposing them when we aren't around.  I want my children to have a relationship my parents but it will be on my terms.  They have proven themselves incapable of respecting our wishes in things both religious and secular so we can't trust them.  You can peruse that thread I had linked in my earlier reply to show how I had to approach the situation with them.  Considering I am the only son in the area and my older brother decided he only wanted two children and my younger brother is "married" to a man, my parents are fortunate that they have grandchildren in the area they can actually see in person on a regular basis.

This is too much pressure and too much fear being handed down to the parents, which in turn will be handed down to the children, which inadvertently might cause problems detrimental to faith, since faith should be supported by love not fear.

To be fair, in my Baltimore Catechism Four book by TAN it says:

285. Q. Which are the effects of the Sacrament of Matrimony?
A. The effects of the Sacrament of Matrimony are: first, to sanctify the love of husband and wife; second, to give them
grace to bear with each other's weaknesses; third, to enable them to bring up their children in the fear and love of
God. 
..."Bring up their children."  This is their most important duty, and parents receive grace to perform it, and woe be to them if they abuse that grace."

As you said, it is about striking a balance and that is why we have so much pressure and we need the graces.  It's also not just a Trad notion as I mentioned my friends and also I have a book called Legacy: A Father's Handbook for Raising Godly Children by Stephen Wood who is a NO (I believe) layman.  He says on page 18:

Dad, you must grasp the truth that creating a legacy of faith through the training and discipline of your children is a real man's job.  It is your job.  In fact, it is your most important responsibility on earth, because whatever you do (or fail to do as a father will have effects for generations - and for eternity.

Finally, I have a book from 1954 (but newly set in 2004) from Mary Reed Newland called How to Raise Good Catholic Children.  On Page 6 she says:

It's amusing to observe the contradictions apparent int he comparison of materialism versus spirituality, but it's not amusing for long - because there's more involved than a game.  Each man caught in the embrace of materialism is a soul in danger of hellfire, and each soul is infinitely precious to God.  For those of us who are parents, the challenge is terrible indeed.  We have placed in our case for a few short years precious immortal souls who belong to God, whose destiny is an eternity in and with God, and who depend entirely upon us for the formation of a way of life that will lead them surely to God.  And woe to us if we fail in this charge."

She goes on to list some practical examples about blaming kids playing in traffic or fires a gun whose parents have failed to instruct them.  She then says:

Then who shall blame a child whose sail turns eagerly to the noise and distraction of wordiness, if his parents failed to show him that love and peace and beauty are found only in God?

I think we can be forgiven if we realize we have a few short years to try to train our young children in being able to handle the world.  It's a different matter for older kids as they have been trained and will need to be able to defend themselves on their own and I agree that a bunker mentality is not the proper approach.

*edited for some grammar

[Gardener]

Chris,

Are you saying that those parents who set boundaries for their children, in the case of Stu Cool and myself simply that a set of grandparents are not allowed to be alone with the grandkids for legitimate concerns about the catechetical fallout, despite those grandparents having every opportunity to be around said grandkids and otherwise participate in the grandkids' lives, are "bunker trads"?

If so, that's a very novel use of the term when the use of the term is typically about those who seem to completely shrink from being "in" the world, view everything as evil.

To protect a child from scandal is an act of charity. To keep someone from having an opportunity to scandalize a child is also an act of charity, particularly when said person has demonstrated a propensity for it.

[6] But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea

Matthew 18