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.
April 30, 2014 at 3:09 pm
I actually let my kids hop on me. Well, the younger ones. They get a kick out of it.
April 30, 2014 at 3:16 pm
Too violent, huh? Wonder if the complainant is pro-choice?
April 30, 2014 at 4:02 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 5:04 pm
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."
April 30, 2014 at 5:17 pm
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."
April 30, 2014 at 6:05 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 6:05 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 6:08 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 7:02 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 7:13 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 7:33 pm
Patrick Archbold: A vocation to blog is not be set aside, at least you blog. What are your critics doing?
April 30, 2014 at 7:51 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 7:57 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 8:03 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 8:09 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 8:19 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 8:21 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 8:25 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 8:28 pm
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.
April 30, 2014 at 8:32 pm
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?