Shame Shame on The CCL for promoting AP Parenting

The Couple to Couple League, for those who don't know, is an organization which promotes the mentality of Choosing Life in this screwed up world which contracepts.

They are advocates for sensible fertility awareness and periodic self-control combined with prayerful discernment with emphasis on the blessing of children, as opposed to presenting the "Family Size" issue with the fanatical eye (ie. Let's all beg God for and try to have 35 children no matter what) or with the world's viewpoint (ie. Let's all have no kids because the bunnies are dying and storms are scary so we 'll just kill ourselves and our potential babies with hormones, and if that doesn't work we'll kill them when they get a little bigger. If that still doesn't work we'll feed their selfishness as they grow so that they might kill each other later.)

I am so onboard with the "Official" Catholic position on Birth Control. That position is quite simple: it's that if you think birth control is a good idea, you're wrong.

OK, so let's pause for a minute, because if this sounds crazy to you, birth control is so much a part of your mentality that your head might have just exploded when you heard that. Birth Control is a GOOD, RESPONSIBLE thing, right?

Wrong. The Birth Control Pill has only existed for about 30 years. In those thirty years, it has only been ACCEPTED by Christian communities for about fifteen. Why? Because of it's intended purpose. Because of what it does to women's bodies. Because of what it creates and grows in a marriage.

I'm not going to give you a Bible Lesson on the blessedness of a fruitful womb or on the privilege of our Co-Creation with God or even on the absolute insanity of accepting into our bodies something which is capable of destroying not only a new baby's life but also OUR OWN. (the pill is listed as a KNOWN CARCINOGEN!)

There is PLENTY of research out there to demonstrate the monstrosity that the Pill really is. Yes, I find it shocking that women all over the world who meditate, exercise, pray and eat organic foods still contracept as if it was good and fruitful despite the fact that we allegedly live in the "information age." Believe me, someone is working very hard to ensure that the idea of the Pill being a bad thing gets silenced and shut down. And yes, there's a money trail. Follow it.

There are also plenty of quiverfull websites out there and Catholic websites out there that will dispel your fears about having more than two kids and that are intended to teach you to think differently about what's important in life. And no, that doesn't mean we all think you need to have more than one child to fulfill God's will for your family.

I HIGHLY recommend the protestant book Family Unplanning for an in depth exposition on an accurate worldview with regards to family planning.

And yes, it takes a stance against using ANY type of "family planning" method. And that has always been the Church's teaching, until the Church has been asked to elaborate due to the demands of this age. So now the Church recommends that couples practice a fertility awareness method and abstain during fertile periods...not all the time but IF THERE IS A GRAVE reason. In other words, if you don't have a job, pray and ask God if you are supposed to abstain for a while during fertile moments (yes, there's that "abstaining for a time of prayer" line from scripture.) If you have cancer, stop and ask God together whether you should continue not abstaining during fertile moments.

The myth is that the Catholic Church promotes NFP as "THE" Catholic answer- that's a line the progressives are working hard to feed you. The reality is that the Catholic Church practices and teaches Quiverfull ideas COMBINED with common sense, which makes it unfanatical and totally worth looking at. You cannot tell me that you can build a scriptural case for contracepting. It really is that simple.

So moving along, the premise of the Theology of the Body and the whole concept of a Catholic marriage is built around this foundation-- that families are forever because God works through people, loves people, and asks us to participate with him in creating and raising up Kingdom Dwellers. Right? If you're not going to be bringing children into this world and training them up, then scripture and the Church asks you to re-consider whether you are supposed to be married at all. After all, that IS the purpose of the married state, and NOT the warm fuzzy feelings generated by paying bills together and enjoying meals together. Marriage is to make families, and in order to do that, you should be open to having kids. It's not about YOU. It's about why God put you here-- for others, not for yourself.

So with this in mind, even though I'm more "quiverful" in my mentality, I support the pro-NFP activities of the Church and in the protestant world because I know that NFP is like a bridge between the culture of death and the culture of life, and further that it is frequently necessary, if only for a while, in our day and age.

The important thing, to me, is to support individuals and organizations that preach that there is an intimate connection between your openness to life as a couple and the health of your marriage, of your bodies, and of your full spiritual life.

Now, if I am going to be supporting the idea that married couples SHOULD be having children, and not just one or two for the most part,(and remember, I believe that God is Lord over each couple, that some are called to have one child, others none, and others to have 13 and that it's not MY job to tell them)--
but if we are going to promote HAVING babies we need to be promoting efficient parenting techniques as well. Because the image of the drowning housewife who is overrun by rowdy kids is one society sells us on a regular basis-- how many times a DAY on any given outing do people make comments to me, the mother of three, about how atrocious motherhood is EVEN THOUGH my kids are well-behaved?? I can only imagine being the parent of seven, or twelve!

The thing is, guys, the Bible has the answers about your fertility but it doesn't leave you hanging when it comes to parenting-- it has those answers too! And you don't need ME to teach them to you: spend a few days pouring over Proverbs and make a list of the scriptures that pertain to parenting, you will find yourself with a pretty good picture of what a good, godly parent looks like. No, there ARE answers, and we CAN find them in two places: in the Bible, and in the teachings of the Church.

Which is why I was absolutely horrified and disgusted to find an article in the CCL's magazine, Family Foundations, highlighting the Sears family and their "attachment parenting" teachings as solid Catholic Truth to all the NFP couples who depend on this magazine for support in training and raising their little ones.

Let me start by saying that I am FIRMLY against the fundamental concepts of Attachment Parenting, as you well know, believing two things about it:

1. Attachment Parenting operates under a false premise and paints a false picture of "non-AP parents."
It is not a "new idea" or "revolutionary" that we must meet our children's NEEDS. Every parenting philosophy from the beginning of time keeps this fundamental principle in mind and all parents should theoretically agree on it.
To set those who do not practice Attachment Parenting and do practice corporal punishment as "not compassionate" or "unkind" is absolutely preposterous. It is not an average non-AP parent who ENJOYS spanking her children or letting them cry it out periodically, but rather she recognizes that it is the best thing for the child-- just as she doesn't like saying "No, you cannot have another cookie" to a smiling, gleeful two year old. What kind of parents would we be if we constantly indulged our children and responded to them by giving in to their every whim and desire? Terrible ones. Ones who are building selfish little monsters who always get their way. Which is why I RESENT the implication that non-AP parents are unkind. We are long-term thinkers. We are giving our children love that is neither emotionally-driven nor self-serving, because often the REWARDS of our parenting style come not immediately but in the long term, when we observe good character and virtue and thankfulness in our children. A child who has been corrected will not be happy about it at the time. He will not indulge the parent with loving behavior and a sweet disposition right away. However, when the same situation arises, the corrected child will then CHANGE his behavior, and thus the desired results are achieved. Non-Ap parents are concerned with our children's HEARTS, not their actions. We are particularly attentive to the underlying belief patterns that form behavior, and diligent to correct those as they present themselves wrong. We do not distract, redirect, or remove the temptation from the child as a general rule. We teach them to overcome their unhealthy desires. It's a winning style of parenting, and it is far more challenging than the AP style of parenting, if nothing else because if you do not respond to your child with constant emotional flattery and warm mushy feelings, you will not always be "popular" right off the bat. You will frustrate. You will annoy.
AP operates on a FALSE premise, which is that non-adherents are wrong about their children's abilities, mean, and callous. No. We are talking about warm, happy, loving families here.

2. Dr Sears and his wife alongside AP Parenting adherents present corporal punishment as "unbiblical," "unhealthy" and "incorrect." The reality is that there is absolutely nothing in the Bible, nor in modern psychological SCIENCE that proves such a thing, even though it pretends to.
First, psychology is a soft science, and we must be careful not to accept it's hypotheses, polls,statistics, recommendations and ideas as "fact." I address Roman Catholics here, and say that the Church has NEVER pronounced a judgement regarding corporal punishment- it fully allows each individual family to make the decision to use or not use spanking as a tool for discipline, provided that the child is harmed neither emotionally nor physically. Thus those of us who care what God thinks will turn to the Word to see if IT has anything to say. And it does. Again, I will not give you a Bible study here but suffice to say that if you do as I recommended and take down all of the parenting verses and do the word research yourselves, you will find that corporal punishment is in actuality a perfectly recommended form of discipline according to the Bible. That being said, I don't know a single parent who believes in spanking who says that you MUST spank your child. Simply that you can because it is effective.
However, AP parenting does just the opposite- it paints an unfair and completely inaccurate portrayal of the Spanking Parent, and as such is not a reliable source for parenting information.

Which is why I was absolutely disgusted to find a HUGE article about parenting like the Sears family in this issue of Family Foundations, the Couple to Couple League's magazine destined for reading by parents who are learning to accept more children into their marriages as a blessing. WHY? In the interview, the Sears family contrasted their experiences as protesants being told to parent a certain way with their experience of returning to Catholicism, going so far as to say that "The Catholic way of discipline is typically not based on spanking." I'm sorry, WHAT? The last time I checked the ONLY official stance of the Roman Catholic Church can be found in CCC 2223:

Parents have the first responsibility for the education of their children. They bear witness to this responsibility first by creating a home where tenderness, forgiveness, respect, fidelity, and disinterested service are the rule. The home is well suited for education in the virtues. This requires an apprenticeship in self-denial, sound judgment, and self-mastery -- the preconditions of all true freedom. Parents should teach their children to subordinate the "material and instinctual dimensions to interior and spiritual ones." Parents have a grave responsibility to give good example to their children. By knowing how to acknowledge their own failings to their children, parents will be better able to guide and correct them:

He who loves his son will not spare the rod. ... He who disciplines his son will profit by him.

Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.

Basically, if you're Dr or Mrs Sears and you're teaching that the Catholic Church teaches AP parenting, or you are the Editor of the CCL and promulgating this information to your readers without sharing the other side of the story, shame on you!

The facts are that the Roman Catholic Church promotes openness to life and responsible parenting, and that it is up to the individual couple to educate themselves via scripture and Church doctrine insofar as what that might mean. Don't be fooled-- Attachment Parenting is NOT the "Catholic" parenting solution, nor is it the "ONLY" responsible parenting solution. I am deeply disappointed that an organization which so many Catholic parents hold in high esteem would spread such distasteful false doctrine among it's unsuspecting readers. Much damage is done to children and new moms who swallow the AP pill.

To be FAIR to the AP crowd who will inevitably read this, I do believe your purpose is well-intentioned, albeit misguided. You want people to nurture children. I'm all for that-- our job is to nurture our children, to provide for their true needs, to build a bond with them and to provide them with unconditional love and security. On this we agree and there is much goodness here. I think a sensible, AP-Parenting family who understands the need for setting boundaries and correction can still create a "good" child. I am not doubting your methods or convictions if you meet the above criteria.

The main issue I have with AP Parenting is the assertion it makes that a spanking or that a failure to pick up a crying baby -- one whose other needs have been fully met but just wants to be picked up-- results in HARM to a child. While it would be easier to assert the opposite and prove it, I'm not going to bother. I will simply say that I find the promotion of AP parenting which is ALL OVER our modern culture from books to magazines to websites to be dishonest and utterly frightening in it's propagandist methods and its purpose to quickly and efficiently remove all parents who do NOT parent the same way from society, to question their sanity, or to accuse them of abuse.

How DARE the CCL's Family Foundations Magazine Editors promote the Popcaks (of Parenting with Grace) or the Sears as "experts" in Catholic Parenting?? Exactly what are their qualifications? For NFP users and Catholic readers of Family Foundations believe that Holy Scripture AS INTERPRETED BY THE Magesterium, and ONLY the Magesterium, may tell the rest of us how we are to live.

For those readers who are interested in either hearing a sensible defense of the idea that spanking might not just be "acceptable" but "good" parenting, and for those who seek to understand why many of us are so passionate about NOT Attachment parenting our children, I present to you an article written by a Tennesse Preacher who ministers mostly to Amish and plain people. This man and his wife once wrote a book entitled To Train up a Child which was given to me when I had my first child. The information and ideas in this book are so simple-- it teaches that children are watching and are smart, so that we are constantly training them one way or another by our actions. Thus the premise of this book is that when the Bible says to "Train up a child" it literally means it-- we are to purposely train our children, working with them to teach them basic obedience and good sense not "on the side" as we go through life but by setting them up in situations where they will learn, thus eliminating the frustration of corrective discipline almost altogether. This idea horrifies most people who have been brought up as parents with the AP mindset because it directly recommends what they call "over-parenting" but what we call "immediate obedience and respect for parental authority and involvement." Because of their position, the Pearls have been vilified and accused of every form of abuse and atrocity, alongside anyone who (like me) would dare to recommend them to members of our psychologized and utterly brainwashed socialist society.
Therefore, I HIGHLY recommend that if you have a problem with what you've read here or can't understand the reason I and many like me are so vehemently anti-AP,you read the following apologia by Michael Pearl on the varying methods most spanking parents will use. This does not mean that I think the Pearls are "perfect." As I said, it is the Magesterium, and the Magesterium alone, who has the authority to dictate exactly WHAT parental discipline should look like. My family does not personally use all of the methods laid out by the Pearls or ANY "parenting teacher." We prayed about it, studied our bibles, and asked those people we know and respect who have what we consider to be "good" grown children what they had done, developped a plan, and implemented it.

Nevertheless, I am asking you to read this article because it says what I would want to say to you, readers, in such a way that I hope you will come to understand that we are not raging for no reason-- there is a definite satanic plan in place to destroy the family any way he can. The AP parenting technique is a lie. The fear of spanking, obedience training, and parental authority and involvement is a lie. A lie which virtually everyone in this society is being conditioned to believe. Which is why I am disgusted to read this lie in a magazine that Catholics all over America probably consider "Gospel Truth" when it comes to parenting and what fertility is.
Though I do not doctrinally "line up" 100 percent with the Pearls in matters of theology, in matters of common sense living I think there are very few teachers/ministers available to the American public who do a good job helping families to grow together in love and mutual charity and respect. Their wisdom comes from years of raising their own family and is not "theoretical" but practical and proven. I credit their book, "Created to be a Help Meet" with saving my marriage, and their book "To Train up a Child" with giving me much food for thought with regards to the PURPOSE of our parenting. So if you are looking for a good alternative parenting option, I recommend the folks at No Greater Joy and at Raising Godly Tomatoes to everyone I know.

His excellent article explaining why the proliferation of AP teaching is dangerous can be found HERE

A PERSONAL NOTE: ANY ATTEMPTS TO ENGAGE ME FURTHER IN COMMENTS ABOUT MY PERSONAL PARENTING PRACTICES WILL BE IGNORED, SO DON'T BOTHER. THIS IS NOT ABOUT HOW I PARENT BUT RATHER ABOUT WHAT A CATHOLIC ORGANIZATION SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT PROMOTE AS "CATHOLIC" PARENTING. THANK YOU.

Seasonal change

September is quickly passing by and is the deadline I had set to make some changes that I hope will increase my productivity in the things that really matter. The reality is that I pour energy and time into facebook, twitter and my blog when I could be helping my family out by pouring that time into working on my book and editing projects. I do it because I love to encourage you, but I think that things will be more coherent, more encouraging AND more useful to you AND me if I focus on writing my book.

I am also just starting to have a baby who is old enough NOT to be held most moments in the day so I think I'm going to be able to get back to knitting and sewing more, as well as to working out and physical exercise more, which I am ecstatic about as I have REALLY missed each of these parts of my life very much.

I am committed to helping my husband out and so I must slow down on the blogging even more than I already have and REALLY focus. So I apologize if my posts become few and far between until next Spring, but that's what I've got to do! Praying for you all and thankful to be on the journey with you. Please pray for me in this new season and help keep me accountable if I start posting a lot anytime soon. :P

Blessings!

JDubs and Working women. Who needs to leave the house?

My Father in Law decided to have a consultant come by today for a visit to talk about ways to reduce his taxes and certain types of financial decisions that might help him. Wayne and I cleaned up the dining room and the kids so they would be comfortable, and I made a lunch so we could all stay outside and keep the noise level down while they talked.

She came in and seemed like such a nice and interesting woman-- very pretty, dressed in business attire and very confident. She spoke warmly about her neighborhood and her family, and then he began to introduce all of us. As he counted the kids' heads and shared a little something about each one of them and me, she listened and said hello. But as soon as she was introduced to me, she said: "Well, bless your heart! I know it's tough, mama, but it will get better soon. Before you know it they will be out of the house and you can relax. I KNOW it's tough. Don't worry, it's not forever. Bless your heart. All these kids running around. My goodness!"
I smiled politely, and said: "Best job in the world." And I meant it. Funny how I don't even have to leave my house to get fed a dose of the world's false ideas about parenting.

Shortly thereafter, we were on the porch and I started to notice a ton of cars pooling around the top of the hill. Out came men, in pairs, wearing suits and ties in the early September heat. I always get a thrill when the missionaries come a knockin', mostly because I LOVE to discuss religion with other people who are as passionate about it as I am.
As they came up my driveway, I understood that they were Jehova's Witnesses from the books they were carrying, so familiar to me from my time with the J-Dubs. It was providential for them that I was out there and not my FIL, nor my husband or his brother who were both home at the time, because they would have loved the opportunity to send them packing. The kids and I said hello and we passed around introductions. I let them give me the "Are you concerned about all of the violence and crime in the world?" opener, and followed along with them as they read to me from Proverbs about where to find wisdom for life. They were impressed that I was able to follow along from my own bible, which was sitting beside me when they walked up. I let them give me the line from their new go-to book about how knowledge of the Scriptures was the answer, and listened to the closer about how they had the answers and would be willing to give me a free bible study to help me learn The Truth.
At that point, I stopped him, and very gently explained that I was absolutely where I felt I was supposed to be, that I wasn't seeking, and that I thanked them so much for taking the time to worry about my soul. I told him that though I had known what he was trying to do, I had let him talk because it was good practice and I hoped he didn't mind. He laughed at that. We talked a little more.

They were AMAZED that I knew about Jehova's Witnesses, respected them, didn't disagree with them in too many areas, and yet didn't want to BE a witness. They asked me to explain further, so I told them that I thank God for my past encounters with Jehova's Witnesses, through whom I had gleaned above all a devotion to the Word of God. It was them who taught me to search the scriptures, and through them I gained such a deep appreciation of scripture. God can use anything and anyone!

I also learned to be set apart from the world-- when I spent time with other Jehova's Witnesses, I was ALWAYS amazed at what a good life they led. Honest, hard working, and full of charity, the people I saw put others first and had a genuine love of scripture study-- their get togethers were so wholesome and enjoyable without any EXTERNAL, anyways, signs of vice or violence. Is there other stuff there? Absolutely. I've heard some firsthand accounts that were just awful about being "inside" the cult of the WatchTower, stories that were devastating.

But ultimately? I can't help but admire the tenacity and righteousness of a people who spend their OWN money to go door to door telling people about the hope they have, only to be met with door slams, lying, and even threats of violence. Nothing deters them from what they consider their holy duty. And why don't we do this? Why don't we go from door to door in pairs sharing the good news? We would do well to watch and learn. If there were Catholic groups doing this, I'd be the first to sign up-- what a blessing to be able to spread the Word from house to house!

When they left, my kids waved them off. Ishod gave them a firm handshake and Annika thanked them for coming to our house to tell us about the God and the Bible. She reminded them to pray for us and promised to pray for them. And they smiled and went on their way. A few minutes later, my brother in law and father in law came out, visibly sad they had missed the opportunity to "shut them down."

But blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth!

I thank God for my little encounters this morning, all good reminders to be good and do good, to live my life as a testimony to others for the convictions I have. When these people showed up, I was outside playing with the kids and reading the Bible to them.How cool is that? We were living witnesses of the truth.

Review: The Last Exorcism

SPOILER WARNING

I went to a movie with some girlfriends yesterday. It was the first time in months I'd been to see anything, so the entire experience was totally thrilling for me... and quite amazing when you consider that the last time I was a regular movie-goer, all it took was ten bucks to get you a show and some popcorn.





The Last Exorcist left me scratching my head and my heart. It's not so much that I was trying to decide if I loved it or hated it, but rather that I found it simultaneously brilliant and mindbogglingly moronic, and that while the film itself was not frightening, it's potential impact on society and on the modern view of exorcism terrified me.

Let me say right off the bat that this is not an "important" film. I live with this faint hope that every new movie on the topic of demonology I might see will somehow finally have it all together and give an accurate portrayal of demonic activity. One that incorporates a proper worldview, accurate description of symptoms, and cuases, and a healthy and skeptical view of psychology.
This was not one of those, although it contained elements which gave me the impression throughout that this might finally be it. It was very disappointing.

There is a current trend in Hollywood to discredit and mock Christianity. Even in the previews, that element was magnified throughout each clip, so I wasn't totally surprised to see the film open on a total mockery of your average evangelical charismatic experience.
The scene opens on a typical Southern Sunday morning- a nice looking family is getting ready for Church. The Pastor is preaching and the place is hopping. Literally. It's a pentacostal/holiness type environment. Very charismatic.
As the scene unravels, it becomes clear that the pastor who is preaching operates out of total hilarity instead of sincerity. Everything is a joke to him, and as he explains to the off-screen cameraman filming his documentary, it's all a manipulation.

I'm not the type of person to get bent out of shape and outraged over films mocking Christianity... after all, I believe in Eternal Justice. And in personal freedoms. However, I wasn't quite braced for the immensity of the mocking that was about to ensue. At the same time, as I watched it unfold, I found myself wanting to stand up and cheer-- because the "Christianity" that it was mocking is EXACTLY why I left the protestant world and came home to Rome. Manipulation of the senses, incomplete theology, and a general sense that one must leave one's intellect at the door all contributed to this feeling that there had to be more out there. The opening of this film is all about that.

The film opens with the story of the family of a pastor named Cotton Marcus who "fell into" pastoring because he was a pastor's kid. Like all PKs, he grew up seeing the "fill-the-pews business" in action. Preaching his first packed house at the ripe old age of ten, Cotton grew up speaking Christianese and simultaneously wondering what the heck was going on around him when he knew others were "faking it" too. Part of his upbringing was, of course, deliverance work, something all the God-fearing men before him appear to have had a special "gifting" for, as evidenced by the Really Old Book he inherits from his father which contains-- get this-- the names of all the demons in existence.

Ok, break to my inner facepalm moment. Why? Because I've been in the deliverance field for over 12 years and I've never in my life encountered a person or book that could name ALL the demons. At the same time, in 12 years, I've probably encountered more than 10, 000 people/books/apps which claim to.
A demon's name is virtually irrelevant. It will tell you something about his character if you are a very old, very learned, very experienced exorcist. Other than that, there is not a person on the planet, Fr Gabriel Amorth included, who "knows all the demons' names." And we don't have to! The fact is, it truly isn't all that important. A name is not a magic formula that gives you power over someone, despite what all the goth kids in high school wanted you to believe. The only name which will one day cause all knees to bow is Jesus.
Superstition and pride abound in this field, and of all the giant red flags I have that go up when I'm partnered with an inexperienced deliverance minister, the Name Game is one of the most obvious. It is a myth and fallacy that we must first discover a fallen angel's name before casting it out. It is often not even necessary to know anything about it at all-- virtually everything which comes out of a demon's "mouth" is a lie from the pit of hell anyhow, designed to confuse and obstruct the exorcist. It's as painful to hear someone claim to have a "resource" for demonic names as it is to watch Ryan Buell hush his paranormal group when he writes "THE NAME" of the alleged demon that's following him on a mysterious hidden piece of paper, further shocking his audience for wow-value when he reveals the alleged-name-we-cannot-say over TELEVISION for all to repeat if his hypothesis is correct, thus theoretically condemning all his viewers to a life of pursuit by said dangerous demon.
If there's anything I've learned in all these years, it's that most demons are quite dumb (not in an intelligence sense- they are clearly more "knowledgeable" than you or I, but in a personality sense) because the majority of demons people encounter are lower echalon, bottom-of-the-barrel critters who operate solely on the orders and at the command of other demons which certainly don't have time bothering most individual people. They are busy commanding nations and battlefields, hovering patiently over the UN, the Denver airport, and the Vatican in thick clouds of darkness. Heehee.

OK, back to the movie. So there I was, sitting in my seat, kind of outraged at my own self as I giggled helplessly over the sheer brilliance of this guys' perfect fake-out of the Christian walk. At the same time, I wanted to cheer-- this stuff NEEDS to be said! It needs to be addressed in Christianity today, it is something we Christians find very uncomfortable for a good enough reason. It's the uncomfortable truth that shows that "Churchiness" doesn't work. There is no power in churchiness.

The purpose of the film was to document him doing an exorcism in order to demonstrate that exorcism is bogus. At first, you're thinking-- what a creep. But then you realize, this is a man acting on a powerful personal conviction. He explains that seeing a child who was harmed during an exorcism ritual is the cause behind his gig. Completely outraged, he decided once and for all to expose exorcism for what it is: a fraud that makes people who THINK they are possessed feel better.

In order to do this he has a literal bag of tricks-- a smoking crucifix, rings that push voltage through a person causing them to seize, speakers and fake demon growls, and fishing line designed to secretly move items around the room. The Works. Cotton is determined to do this for a good cause-- after all he wants to help the children, right? And this is where it begins to get frustrating to me.

In a moment of explanation when you, the viewer, are really connecting with him and his "good heart," he holds up a document (an ACTUAL document) put out by the Vatican which describes their new School of Exorcism. And proceeds to talk about how annoying it is to him that this is allowed...as if just any yahoo off the street can now become a Vatican-Sanctioned exorcist.

No. A Roman Catholic exorcist is a demonstrably mature Roman Catholic Priest appointed by a Bishop, thus a responsible single male with six years of theological and interpersonal training and eduction, either assisted by or himself a psychologist and / or medical doctor. That's not the kind of level-headed approach to the topic that his anger is directed at. And it's misleading to the viewers who are watching this movie, as I am, shaking their heads "YES, Cotton, preach it! This whole exorcism thing is out of control!"

So, there we have Big Mistake Number One: equating Roman Catholicism to Protestantism.... our methods are not their methods. Our ways are not their ways. First of all, we INVENTED exorcism... or rather, the methods we use were directly taught by Our Lord to the Apostles and they haven't changed a bit since then-- that is, until Vatican II, but don't get me started.:P

All this to say that the image of Bob Larsen, exorcist, on TV slathering foreheads in holy oil or even that Cotton himself is using-- well, those images are Catholic in nature because we have sacramentals. We believe that OBJECTS can hold power, either positive or negative, and by the authority of our Church we use these items to do good and advance the Kingdom of God. Protestant theology is a bit shaky in this department- and certainly inconsistent (if you use an object in a rite or ritual, by what authority is the object consecrated one way or the other? Aren't you putting your faith in an object and not God, directly? It's ok for you to plant stakes with scripture written on them at the four corners of your house, but it's not ok for me to burn incense and think it's "doing something?" etc etc.) These questions are no bother to a Catholic because we have a clear cut, logical and sensible answer to every "why?" But they are very bothersome to someone like me when I see a protestant person use them. In fact, they scream superstition...
I have infinitely more respect for protestant persons in the deliverance field who exorcise demons by the power of prayer through faith alone (and maybe the laying on of hands) than those protestants who brandish crosses with zeal and slap the demonized around theatrically with their Bibles. But I digress.

Cotton's "Last Exorcism" is on a seriously secluded farm in backwoods Louisiana. Awesome setting for us paranormal people, who know that Louisiana is indeed a dark and mysterious area. He is accompanied by an impossibly hip young woman wearing -- seriously?-- red Doc Martens, and an invisible camera man we never really meet.
The first few moments of his creep up the dirt road leading to the Sweetzer farm we encounter the Sweetzer son, an obviously disturbed young man whom we are certain is going to be The One. However upon further investigation, we are told that it's really his impossibly sweet younger sister who is the possessed person, as explained by her highly gullible, hard working, God-fearing alcoholic father. The mother has died, and the well-intentioned but thoroughly ignorant father, determined to teach the children some religion, has pulled the kids out of school AND Sunday school with the local pastor, whom he found to be just "not enough" as far as instilling The True Faith goes.

Lo and behold, Cotton manages to manipulate the dad into giving the girl an exorcism, and he goes upstairs to rig the room so that he can deliver the powerful theatrics he came ready to show us, the viewers.
Up until this point, I'm thoroughly entertained-- engrossed even-- in the plot and definitely interested to see what transpires, although I've already guessed that "this time" things aren't going to go exactly as smoothly as he had planned. Moving along in the story, he conducts the fake exorcism, fake delivers the girl, and then goes home to a nasty motel with his crew where he will wait for morning.

And that's when it gets interesting, although you wouldn't know it from the choppy editorial choices and the sheer chaos that represents the transition into the film's "Deeper" plot. The girl somehow makes it to his hotel room and , as if in a trance, proceeds with what can only be described as classic horror flick scene complete with oatmeal-looking vomit and a small taste of potential lesbian foreplay. I was kinda like... REALLY? It was a true disappointment that the movie had taken such a generic turn, but I accepted that it "had to be" if the movie was going to continue on the path it was on towards true symptomatic possession.

I'll spare you the details, because quite honestly, they are pretty much the standard for exorcism-genre movies and you've seen or heard almost all of them before.... little girl with wierd drawings, memory lapses, sudden strange behavior which progresses in creepiness, and suddenly the flick got downright WEIRD.

I have a true distaste for slasher flicks. While I absolutely LOVE horror films, I don't usually watch them if they are graphically violent. I'm not interested in seeing people be dismembered or in watching buckets of blood splatter in every direction. I like psychological thrillers- movies that make you think. I don't mind a little graphic bloodshed, but I draw the line at gratuitous violence, and this movie is FULL of gratuitous violence. I had to sit and watch a cat get torn to pieces. Literally. Virtually every interaction with the possessed girl was drenched in blood and guts... even random nasty eye poking. Yuck. Now, I will say that I've seen enough actual demonic disregard for the human body to know that things CAN and sometimes do get utterly disgusting. But the reality of that experience is far more sober and less gleeful. It's heartbreaking to see a person cut himself or another. It's not the kind of thing you want to be shoving fistfuls of popcorn in your mouth at, which was what the people around us seemed to be doing... and that's because the director didn't show the violence of possession in an intelligent, realistic manner. This was obviously all about the horror-genre glory in blood and guts.

In a world where people will actually pay money to see SIX (or however many) movies about a stupid wheelchair bound clown-faced creep who devises and implements torture methods onscreen for two hours a piece (SAW, I'm looking in your direction, and I'm not smiling, you sick bastards...) I guess I just have to accept that mind-numbing visual violence that utterly negates the HUMANNESS of the human body is something Hollywood is OK with promoting. Surprise!

However, there were some incredible connections that stirred me on some level as well. The suspense was well-handled, although often quite contrived. The representations of the symptoms of possessions were also well-handled, yet at other times completely off-target. I found myself getting extremely uncomfortable in certain scenes that hit too close to home...Scenes that were all too familiar to those of us who have encountered the devil's handiwork in so obvious a way. The darkening of the eyes, constricting and bubbling of the throat, and unnatural movements, contortions and noise-throwing, conversations with invisible persons which clammed up as Cotton and his crew walked in the door... these were exaggerated, but certainly brought me back to places and situations that have left me changed and unnerved to say the least.
On the other hand, Cotton's obvious TOTAL naivete with regards to actual demonic possession (and -- hello, it's a horror movie-- TOTAL lack of common sense) left me literally wanting to shout at the screen. Aside from the classic "WHAT are you doing?" and "DON'T GO IN THERE" moments I was struggling to contain, I was also holding back "YOU IDOT! IT'S A DEMON, ALL IT DOES IS LIE!" and "IF YOU THINK YOU CAN CONTAIN YOUR PROBLEM LIKE THAT, YOU ARE A MORON. WHAT PART OF NOT A PHYSICAL ENTITY DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?"
Fortunately for my friends and fellow movie-goers, I managed to hold most of it in. :P

We follow the "girl has demon" plot for quite a while, trying to pick our way through random pieces of info ("she's pregnant!" "she's only psychotic!") and to dissect our own judgements ("her dad's the father! no! It's the brother!) and I admit, it's definitely intreguing, albeit mostly inconsistent with what I know about actual possession and exorcism.
A few examples: While the girl is having possessed "episodes," she is unconscious and/or unaware. Outside of these, she doesn't have a sweet clue there is anything inside her. This is totally inconsistent with my life experience,in which people who seek help for demonization are fully aware that they are doing things they don't want to do and are often acting against their own wills. Yes, they can lose consciousness and "make room" for the demon, but more often than not with a little prying we find they are perfectly aware of the difficulties they encounter in living a "normal" life AS THEY WOULD LIKE. (for example, they experience mental confusion whenever they go to pray, and are aware of this fact.)You don't submit to an exorcism because someone ELSE wants you to. At least, I hope not.
Secondly, there is ordinarily a very distinct break in a person's pre-possessed and post-possessed personality. People become markedly different, whereas she remains as sweet and innocent and naive as ever with no major change in personality.

Nevertheless, we press on, watching her go from bad to worse and wondering what Cotton is going to do to help her. What was cool about what ensued was that when Cotton finally came to believe she was possessed and not crazy, some glimmer of actual faith began to propel him and he offered her a second exorcism, promising that this one would, indeed, work. As the power of his faith is unleashed, the exorcism proceeds in the usual manner (and in a super creepy looking shack, no less) with Surprise! the arrival of the ACTUAL demon Cotton had unleashed from his Super Old Demon Name Book with the rudder-like power of his smooth-talking charismatic tongue only hours before in the Sweetzer living room. Only SURPRISE! (Yes, again.)The girl is faking it.... her own super-innocence gives her away and the audience is left schizophrenically shifting from certain conviction of her actual possession to unswerving faith in her total insanity or victimhood and mental capacity to make it up and back again.

At this point, despite the lack of realism and the unoriginal gimmickness factor, I was thoroughly engrossed in the story and entertained.

And that's when it happened- the story line took a turn I was so baffled by I'm still shaking my head going WHAT? WHY??

Ultimately, the ending was enraging. On a purely film/art basis, I was utterly disgusted with the choice to cheese it up and make an obviously unrealistic and purposely idiotic ending.
Cotton discovers that virtually every character we've encountered thus far is a member of a satanic coven engaged in a black mass-type exercise complete with virgin-on-the-altar (Guess who?) with a woman pulling a bloody red baby from her womb to throw into a nearby fire. (YES, that's right, this ending is so freaking lame that a FULL GROWN BABY was pulled from the womb of a girl who was supposed to be only a few weeks pregnant!) What's worse, the very last scene was a downright copy of the Blair Witch Project's last scene. For shaaaaaaaaaame, as I say to my kids.

Then it hit me! That was the sickest and most brilliant thing that Satan himself did with this movie-- the cheese whiz lamesauce ending did what it was supposed to do: it discredited both demonic possession and in particular possession stemming from Satanic Ritual Abuse. People, and in particular the mind-bogglingly wealthy creators of culture in our western society, celebrities and the media have unceasingly waged war on reality by attempting to paint what God has called good evil and what God has called evil good.

I have seen with my own eyes that Satanic Covens and Cults do indeed exist. I have uncovered pockets in our country's landscape where they hold great power, and pockets in our society's socio-political and cultural structure from where they rule and reign. I have seen with my own eyes what happens to victims of Satanic Ritual Abuse, and what SRA will do to people spiritually, as I have prayed both for and with self-proclaimed victims and perpetrators of SRA. To cheapen or diminish this important thing- this crucial knowledge- which so very few of us (shoutout to Vigilant Citizen)have tried to inform others about is to wage war against God and against man, for it is MAN who will suffer greatly from a lack of fear of evil.

It has often been said that Satanic Ritual Abuse is a myth and a lie and that no "educated" person can believe in it. And yet I have seen it, so I must believe. It has been said that Demonic Possession walks too fine a line and that with advances in science we see fewer and fewer cases of ACTUAL possession, if any at all. And yet I have seen it, and so I must believe.

I walked into "The Last Exorcism" like most Americans, expecting to walk into a movie that demonstrated that we can cheat God for only so long before the reality of heaven and hell descends upon us. Instead, I was spoonfed the message that the very core of God's Gospel, the battle between good and evil, is too cheesy, theatrical and contrived to actually be TRUE. Worse, that's its so confusing that it's become comical and that all I need do is to stop thinking and sit back and allow myself to be emotionally and intellectually manipulated because I might actually enjoy it.

And that's what I was left with-- a movie that had so much creative potential to be artistically brilliant that absolutely sucked, and a movie that had so much potential to speak to people on a profound spiritual level that absolutely failed. Worse yet-- it purposely destroyed its own capacity for greatness graphically in order to destroy you morally.

Don't believe the hype, America. The forces of good and the forces of evil are truly locked over your very heads at every moment of every day. You see them on the news and they don't even phase you because you aren't even paying attention. Watch The Last Exorcist and see if you don't come out with a troubled and disappointed spirit. Everything has the power to speak to you if you let it. Choose carefully which voices you heed.