Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.

Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure in spirit, for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake.

Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Matthew 5:3-12

Oh Lord,

Teach me to seek You and reveal yourself to me when I seek You.

For I cannot seek You unless You first teach me, nor find You unless You first reveal yourself to me.

Let me seek You in longing, and long for You in seeking.

Let me find You in love, and love You in finding.

~Saint Ambrose of Milan

<< # St. Blog's Parish ? >>

Name: Erin Yonke

Location: Aurora, IL

Info: I'm happily married to my husband and champion pro-life activist, Matt. I stay home with my three small boys; Ambrose (11/06), Peter (3/08), and Joseph (9/10).

Thursday, April 12, 2007

the no-name post.

Well, Ambrose and I have spent the majority of the day thus far nursing. My diagnosis is that he's probably teething, something we've seen coming for a long time now (we call him the drool monster. it's gross.). This would also explain the runny nose and perpetual whining, and the three loads of laundry that sit unfolded next to me. (has anyone figured out how to do this one-handed??)

Speaking of the drool monster, he's getting quite the collection of fat rolls--probably more after today. He weighs 16 1/2 lbs. He's rolled back-to-tummy several times--about a month ago, and hasn't done it since. He's more focused on grabbing anything in my hands, banging on the keyboard and chewing on everything. It's official. I am in love with him.



Oh, and this picture is from a few weeks ago, with my sisters Hope (left) and Emma (right). They found this little red baseball cap for Ambrose and insisted not only that he wear it, but that it be referred to by it's full name each time it was referenced: the super-cute red hat. (i.e. "where is his super cute red hat?" "oh no, he dropped his super cute red hat!" and so on...)

Comments on "the no-name post."

 

Blogger Sarah said ... (April 12, 2007 2:30 PM) : 

Have you read the Popcak's book Parenting with Grace? I have enjoyed their perspectives and suggestions.

I can pretty safely say that if I had done the "attachment" style with the other three I would not have four children - and not knowing which one I would want to send back, I guess I am glad I did not know about it earlier... but, I also think my second daughter would have greatly benefitted from such treatment. She is by far the neediest and it was only after I started taking the Popcak's advice (some predating my reading of their book, just related to research i was doing on temperament - also a catholic concept) that she has shown quite a bit of improvement.

letting go of the whole "an infant is born sinful and everything they do is a manifestation of that, and we must beat it out with the rod" mentality has been oh so freeing, and yet it's now SO much harder to be a good parent, because things like example and patience play such a bigger role!! it's not so much about bending the child to my will and teaching them the world doesn't revolve around them, but more respecting them as people and valuing their opinions and wishes as well as their basic needs. anyone who thinks catholic parenting (including spank only when necessary) is a cop-out has obviously never done both... it's MUCH harder! much more demanding, time consuming, draining, and rewarding.
email me to chat more about it...
sarahhodges323@bellsouth.net.

 

Blogger Sarah said ... (April 12, 2007 2:39 PM) : 

re: the schedule feeding and protestantism, it's amazing how related these are... if you noticed on my other blog i mentioned in the child rearing post how our old pastor would send a letter to new moms instructing them to schedule feed. demand feeding is basically sinful in his world because it caters to a sinful child.

after reading breastfeeding and catholic motherhood I just can't fathom how my protestant friends do it... this one friend of mine said she would not nurse her baby (6 mos old) to comfort her if she got hurt (i gave an example of someone stepping on her hand). She said she would try everything else because "what if she got hurt and i wasn't there." She said she might decide to nurse the baby if SHE decided that the pain was bad enough to warrant it but it would be a last resort. This is her 4th baby. I have sat there with her many times while the baby screamed and cried in another room or right in front of us but she wouldn't feed her because "it's not time for her to eat yet, it's only been 3 hours." I can't imagine training myself to be so hard to my children's cries that I would no longer have the INSTINCT to nurture and respond the way that God intended us to. It just seems so wrong to me now.

Of course, while I no longer believe in "cry it out" just for the sake of it, even Christina has cried herself to sleep a couple of times, but not because i wanted her to, just because where she was on the priority list (ie she was fed, burped, changed and comfortable and i had other pressing things to do) made me not be able to get to her before she fell asleep on her own.
so what is that, "modified attachment"? :-)

what are you guys doing? just demand feeding, or other sears-style stuff too?

 

Blogger Mrs Jackie Parkes MJ said ... (April 13, 2007 3:42 AM) : 

Hi,
My take on feeding is more controversial! Breast-feed if you like/can..bottlefeed if you lik/can. Obviously my friends who adopt bottle feed. Their kids are OK too..

 

Blogger erin said ... (April 13, 2007 5:56 AM) : 

mrs jackie parkes~
thank you so much for commenting! it interests me to hear you say that--considering that so many women with the experience you have would say the opposite. ("WHAT?! You don't BREASTFEED?! It's a wonder your child isn't retarded!!!") I guess I've just always been of the opinion that even if baby formula won't hurt them in the long run, breastfeeding is certainly better for their bodies & emotional health/security, and that a mother ought to breastfeed if she's at all able. What do you think?

 

Blogger antonia said ... (April 14, 2007 10:57 AM) : 

hello! Just found your blog! I LOVE IT!!

and I too think Ambrose's red hat is super cute!

God Bless

xxx

 

Blogger erin said ... (April 14, 2007 12:40 PM) : 

Antonia~
Thanks!

 

Blogger Kacy said ... (April 17, 2007 7:20 AM) : 

Hey Erin,

Thanks for your comment on my post. It was very helpful. I've considered going to skirts/dresses only before as well, at least in public. For one thing, I think they look good. It also makes a statement about traditional gender roles and the importance of being feminine. I'm trying to slowly adopt this approach, mostly because I don't want to get rid of my clothes before they are worn out. I also see the practicality of wearing pants for exercising or cleaning, and I'd have a hard time giving up flannel pajama pants for sleeping. This is why I take an "in public" approach to wearing skirts. I already do this in the summer, mostly because I think shorts are unbecomming on women.

 

Blogger Kacy said ... (April 17, 2007 8:46 PM) : 

I just got around to reading the article on Catholic Planet. I can agree with the author to an extent, but I have a problem with some of his reasoning. For one, it is bold to say that a woman in pants offends God more than a woman in an unmodest skirt. How does this author know what offends God more? Second, there are pant styles that are clearly designed for women and styles clearly designed for men. No one in society at large would lable a woman in woman's pants as someone "dressing like a man." Thus, these gender distictions are sill maintained even as fashions have changed. Just some thoughts.

 

Blogger erin said ... (April 18, 2007 5:27 AM) : 

Kacy, thanks for reading that! I agree, the author is...um...a little off the deep end, but I think he has some valid arguments. You're right, culture has changed, and no one would look at a woman in pants and gasp or necessarily think she looked like a man. But really, our culture doesn't do much to draw us closer to God, especially in the fashion industry, which is more or less dictated by homosexual men.
I think it's safe to say that God calls us to dress both modestly and femininely--and that a modest skirt is almost always more modest than a modest pair of pants, and is certainly more feminine. (But believe me, on 12 degree days in January, there probably won't be anything anyone can say to keep me out of a pair of pants!)
I guess in thinking about this, I've put alot of thought into the way this decision will impact the way Ambrose (and any other children I have), and how he'll perceive true femininity, and as its counterpart, true masculinity. Anyway, those are my thoughts. Blessings to you and your rapidly-approaching wedding day!

 

Anonymous Anonymous said ... (November 12, 2009 2:17 PM) : 

I found this site using [url=http://google.com]google.com[/url] And i want to thank you for your work. You have done really very good site. Great work, great site! Thank you!

Sorry for offtopic

 

Anonymous Anonymous said ... (December 19, 2009 2:49 PM) : 

NurgeretLient [url=https://launchpad.net/~codeine-tuco]Buy Codeine no prescription[/url] [url=http://manatee-boating.org/members/Order-cheap-Codeine-online.aspx]Order cheap Codeine online[/url]

 

post a comment

Links to "the no-name post."

Create a Link