Editor’s Note:
The following article was submitted to The Remnant by
its author, Mrs. Solange Hertz. It appeared for the
first time, however, in Triumph magazine back in July of
1973, proving once again that Mrs. Hertz is surely one
of the most prescient writers of her generation. I had
an opportunity to visit with Mrs. Hertz at her home in
Virginia this month, and I would like to assure her many
Remnant fans that she is in good health, of sound mind
and fine spirits, even at 92. At some point soon I hope
to write about that visit, in fact, so inspiring and
informative was it to pick the brain of our learned old
friend.
May God bless her always!
MJM
(www.RemnantNewspaper.com)
If
it’s politique d’abord—as W. H. Marshner says it
must be in the November ’72 TRIUMPH—we’ll have to start
at home, because that’s where all the politicians come
from.
No one was more aware of the dynamic interaction of
public polity and the private home than Friedrich
Engels. Writing in 1884 from Karl Marx’s notes, he says
in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and
State, “With the transfer of the means of production
into common ownership the individual family ceases to be
the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is
turned into a social industry. The care and education of
children becomes a public affair; society looks after
all children equally, whether they are legitimate or
not.“And this puts an end to the anxiety about the
‘consequences,’ which is not the most essential
social—moral as well as economic—factor that deters a
girl from giving herself to the man she loves. Will
that not be cause enough to bring about the gradual
establishment of an unconstrained sexual intercourse,
and with this also a more lenient public opinion in
regard to maidenly honor and womanly shape?” (One can
hardly repress a smile here, he sounds so Victorian.)
If anything, Engels overestimated society’s power to
corrupt the home. He postulated—erroneously—that the
home “is the creature of the social system, and will
reflect its culture,” and that it “must advance as
society advances, and change as society changes, even as
it has done in the past.” And woman, of course, is the
pivot upon which society shifts direction. Her
emancipation “first becomes possible when she is able,
on an extensive, social scale, to participate in
production, and house hold work claims her attention
only to an insignificant extent. And this for the first
time has been made possible by modern large-scale
industry, which not only admits women’s labor over a
wide range, but absolutely demands it, and also strives
to transform private household work more and more into a
public industry.”
Public power, on the other hand, “is a product of
society at a certain stage of development; it is the
admission that this society has become entangled in an
intolerable contradiction with itself, that it is cleft
into irreconcilable antagonisms which it is powerless to
dispel….This power arising out of society, but placing
itself above it, and increasingly separating itself from
it, is the State.” As we know, classical Marxism saw
both state and family as necessary evils which would
gradually “wither away” before the advance of the
utopian classless commonwealth.
Thirty-five years before these thoughts were published,
Marx and Engels had already professed in the Manifesto,
“The bourgeois claptrap about the family and education,
about the hallowed correlation of parent and child,
becomes all the more disgusting the more, by the action
of modern industry, all family ties among the
proletarians are torn asunder, and their children
transformed into simple articles of commerce and
instruments of labor.”
Let’s give the devils their due, Capitalism has indeed
catapulted the family into its present condition, but
Marx and Engels laid down as principle that the family
itself is a product of capitalism, doomed to destruction
with it. Poor fellows, as atheists they couldn’t be
expected to know that the family is a mystery, a divine
creation from the beginning, from which all social
systems good and bad have sprung. And will continue to
spring. If revolutionaries have never underestimated
its power to impede their programs, much less should
counter-revolutionaries underestimate its power to
project reform.
Like the Church, the family is founded on rock.
Buttressed from below by the whole mass of natural law,
never could it fail to accomplish what God wills it to
accomplish if sin didn’t throw it off base. Pope Pius
XI underlined the fact that, “Both man and civil society
derive their origin from the Creator, who has mutually
ordained them one to the other. Hence neither can be
exempted from their correlative obligations, nor deny or
diminish each other’s rights….But just as in the living
organism it is impossible to provide for the good of the
whole unless each single part and each individual member
is given what it needs for the exercise of its proper
functions, so it is impossible to care for the social
organism and the good of society as a unit unless each
single part and each individual member….is supplied with
all that is necessary for his social functions.
“There would be today neither Socialism nor Communism if
the rulers of the nations had not scorned the teachings
and maternal warnings of the Church. On the basis of
liberalism and secularism they wished to build other
social edifices which, powerful and imposing as they
seemed at first, all too soon revealed the weakness of
their foundations, and today are crumbling one after
another before our eyes, as everything must crumble
which is not grounded on the one cornerstone of Jesus
Christ” (Divini Redemptoris).
This being the case, the true family has little or
nothing to fear from chaos or even anarchy. In true
chaos, natural structures reassert themselves with a
vengeance, only gaining strength from the dissolution of
the artificial aggregates which were suffocating them.
Unfortunately, there is reason to believe that the kind
of “chaos” we ate facing today is not salutary, but is
itself artificially contrived. In fact we know from the
writings of the fathers of Communism that it is a
deliberately forged political weapon whereby society is
intimidated into accepting ever more tyrannical
structure invading the whole of private life. Against
these, nature itself trembles.
Monarchy at Home
Nature trembles because the political economy is
basically a family affair, its natural outlines first
laid out in the home of Adam and Eve in Eden. Centuries
later, no better political prospectus had yet been
found, for God outlined supernatural, Christian society
from a pattern He laid out, again, in a private home.
This time it was the one belonging to the carpenter
Joseph and his wife Mary in Nazareth, Politique, oui,
but the home d’abord. [Politics, yes, but the
home first.]
Even now at home, the basic political entity, we can see
the interplay of society and individual apart from the
caucus, and certain things stand out. We can’t help
noticing, for instance, that there are no equal rights,
nor even equal votes. The family isn’t a democracy any
more than the Church or any other divine institution.
And it can be said to be an organization only insofar as
it is an organism.
The opinions of the two-year-old are hardly given the
same weight as those of the twelve-year-old. On the
other hand, the two-year-old enjoys some dandy
privileges his older brother doesn’t have, like being
permitted an occasional tantrum, for instance.
All this is a folksy way of noting that the classical
political entity is a hierarchy. It’s not a classless
society. There are gradations and nuances in states of
life, rights and responsibilities. Because these deploy
from Father on down, however and not from the children
on up, or even from aunts and uncles on the sidelines,
family government is something more than merely
hierarchical. It’s a monarchy, with one person
at the top from whom all power and privilege flow. As
far as I know, shocking as this may be, this is the only
form of government formally and positively sanctioned in
Scripture and Tradition, all other forms being merely
permitted for the hardness of our hearts. And this
ideal form reflects not only the monarchical structure
of the universe under God the Father, but the very order
of Persons in the Most Blessed Trinity, where God the
Father is Source of both the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Knowing what aberrations the world would fall into on
this point, God the Father sent His Son to tell the
political hack Pontius Pilate, “You would have no power
against me, unless it were given you from above” (John
19:11). For “above” Pilate may well have understood
merely “Caesar,” but the point is the same, inasmuch as
the source of power is ultimately God, from whom Caesar
himself receives his credentials. It therefore follows
that the human family isn’t even just a monarchy.
Because its true head is God the Father, the human
family is a theocracy, so constituted by its very
nature.
But it’s even more than that. Beginning from the house
in Nazareth in the fullness of time, God the Father
established a Sacred Humanity in the Person of His Son
as absolute ruler of the human family. “All power is
given to me in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). And
He made it clear to the politician Pilate, “I am a
King. For this was I born, and for this came I into the
world.” Telling him also that, “My Kingdom is not of
this world” (John 18:37).
Therefore the Christian family, deriving its
hierarchical, monarchical authority from this divine
Man, is a supernatural political entity deploying in the
world in time, but transcending it utterly. It is an
eternal theocracy. Its citizens are immortal.
Endowed with power from on high, it is invincible. The
Head of the Family had already decreed, “I have overcome
the world.” There are the profoundest theological
reasons for enthroning the Sacred Heart in every
Catholic home.
Parents as Politicians
If parents aren’t politicians, they aren’t parents. The
political authority with which God endowed them in the
beginning over their domestic economy remains anterior
to collectivism, capitalism, democracy, or any other
social makeshifts derived from the delusion that power
comes from below. Parents have power. They use it for
good or ill. In the final analysis, only they can
destroy the home, because ultimately only they possess
the duly constituted, God given authority to do so. Who
else could? In God’s economy, Christ could not have
been executed by anyone on earth but Pontius Pilate.
Nor could He have been handed over to him for trial by
anyone but the high priest Caiaphas. To these men God
the Father had delegated power to kill His Son, should
they so decide. Christ’s condemnation was eminently
legal, a drama of prostituted authority. And Christ
furthermore told Pilate, “He that hath delivered me to
thee hath the greater sin” (John 19:11), for misused
spiritual power has far deadlier effects on its
possessor than mere temporal power misused. Nor did
Pilate stoop to using his authority to incite the people
against Christ as Caiaphas did. Authority used to bend
minds will face the strictest reckoning.
Keeping these facts in mind—and they are facts—we can
see that unless the home deliberately misuses or lays
down its authority of its own volition, it can never be
“the creature of the social system” as Engels teaches,
nor will it “change as society changes” unless it wants
to. Where society falls from the truth, it has first
fallen at home. The Christian home has the obligation
to stand firm on changeless principles entrusted to it.
Did the Christian family of apostolic times conform to
declining Roman culture? Emphatically not, because the
only society to which the home can have valid reference
is the kingdom Christ founded.
The home is the natural ground of counter-revolutions.
Today it must proclaim truth in the very teeth of
error. It will hurt. Even Plato saw that once disorder
occurs, it can be righted only by commensurate
suffering. Revelation and authority clothe society from
above; but natural well-being is produced from below,
where God put it. Anyone who has watched a physical
wound heal over a period of time knows the process
doesn’t occur from the outside in. The wound doesn’t
close by covering itself with healthy tissue from its
outside edges. Healing occurs from below, within the
very wound itself, where healthy cells are activated and
multiply, slowly bur surely displacing the damaged
ones. For a while nothing at all seems to be happening;
in fact the mess usually seems to get worse. The wound
may fester with good results. Or gangrene may set in
where cellular action is too feeble. When this occurs,
amputation is the only remedy.
Only by deep activation of natural law and natural
processes can social wounds be healed today without
violence and destruction, legitimate as these may be as
last resorts. We face a world whose institutions must
be refashioned from the inside out. They can no longer
be patched over to make do. Marx and Engels saw this,
but unfortunately prescribed a heavier dose of the very
irritants that caused the malady in the first place.
America has been making do with second-hand European
errors long enough. The Calvinist interpretation of
usury poisoned her economy from the start; a false
concept of “equal rights’ will in due time dispatch
what’s left of her free government. The family has
suffered cruelly from subscribing to both errors. What
the capitalist didn’t sell the family, the almighty
bureaucrat will soon impose on it by force. But the
theocratic family is still there, deep in suppurating
society and it has the power and authority to increase
and multiply by divine command if it will. It
transformed pagan Rome into the Holy Roman Empire by the
simple expedient of reconstituting itself on the divine
pattern in proper relation to natural law, revelation
and authority. It produced warriors, economists and
politicians who happened to be saints. It can still do
so. There can’t be healthy politics without healthy
politicians, and these are produced in healthy homes.
Worth Doing Badly
Acknowledged or not, Christ is the true head of every
house, the father His vicar, who may act legitimately
therein only as Christ would act. St. Paul draws the
obvious conclusion that the mother therefore bears the
same relation to her husband as the Church bears the
Christ, as the heart to the head, as body to soul. Both
set the norm of obedience in the family—he to God the
Father, she to her husband—for obedience begins with the
parents not with the children, who can imitate only what
they see.
What child can be expected to obey a disobedient
parent? Let’s lay the blame where it belongs. Children
in the family are “the faithful,” the little flock of
Christ who must be fed and led, who are so easily
scandalized, and yet to whom has been promised the
Kingdom. Until every vestige of false “democracy” is
eradicated from the home, obedience will never thrive
there.
Children may certainly be consulted according to their
years and talents (and best in private) as the hierarchy
consults the faithful; but never must parents slough of
their responsibilities on them, relegating major
decisions to the general family pow-wows so dear to the
writers of situation comedies. If children are to
mature and shoulder responsibility themselves, they will
learn by watching their elders fearlessly and doggedly
bearing their burdens, not by being forced to make
decisions beyond their years. If society is losing its
grip on the delightful fecundity and security of
hierarchy, this grip was first lost at home. Where
proper structure is religiously maintained, the home can
keep itself unspotted from the world by quietly
interposing its authority before that of the state where
this has become corrupt.
As a living organism with its mandate from God, the home
is the natural enemy of mere organization. Secure in
its divine origins, it is privileged to play, to disport
itself in the world like Holy Wisdom in the sight of the
Most High. Social or religious movements which seek to
organize it on a purely rational basis should be quietly
ignored. As a theocracy, the home is the citadel of
personal government. Quantitative techniques can’t be
applied there without turning the home into something
other than what it is—a divine mystery.
It can joyously afford to be uneconomical and
inefficient in the ordinary worldly sense, for it obeys
a higher law. If follows a more excellent way. At home
Mother can make a dress for Mary Jane that might be
purchased mass-produced at the super-emporium at a
fraction of the cost in time and money. “If a man
should give all the substance of his house for love, he
shall despise it as nothing!...Many waters cannot quench
charity, and neither can floods [of efficiency experts?]
drown it” (Cant. 8:7)
Home is about the only place left where anything worth
doing is still worth doing badly, as Chesterton put it.
The prudent steward there is free to meet financial
crises by making extra large donations to charity,
perhaps prodding Providence a bit, or to make room for
the new refrigerator by leaving grandma’s old kitchen
table right where she put it. He has a deep,
evangelical distrust of the professional approach to
life, and if the truth be known, of all the
professionals.
Their contribution to the breakdown of the modern home
has been incalculable. Professionals, such as the
healer Dr. Spock, have been permitted, nay, invited, to
reduce the mystery of the home to a system of
superlative techniques—many of which, incidentally,
might be learned very much better from the family cat.
Would you believe it, the home even has a professional
storyteller, the so-called Doctor Seuss. Where are the
Doctors of the Church?
Mothers and fathers have been led to believe that
without professional direction they can’t run a home at
all, so hopelessly has expertise become confused with
authority. Suddenly galloping gourmets are arbiters of
what goes into the stew. Only professional catechists
can transmit the Faith, be it live or on tape.
Professional fornicators invade the bedroom to teach
parents how to “love.” Experts enthroned as the
lares and penates of the hearth usurp its
magisterium in the same way that theologians have
usurped the magisterium of the Church. Demanding
adoration and propitiation from their devotees in return
for the smallest favors, they end by dictating their
every move. Some now openly extort human sacrifice in
the form of compulsory contraception and abortion, and
they are getting it.
Brandishing the letter that kills, they have all but
clubbed to death the spirit that gives life. And giving
life is the business of the home, which is not designed
to turn out professional products, but human beings.
“Thou shalt have no strange gods before Me!” thunders
God the Father, as He did at Sinai. Yet not only do
parents persist in their idolatry, they teach their
children to do likewise. At home children learn to
court these false gods by watching their parents do it.
The many are incited to become truly professional
parents, with homes ordered to the same efficiency and
utilitarianism admired by secular society. Even these,
however, must give way to the lust for speed, because
the devil hasn’t much time left, and time anyway is
money, and a really good family must be a rich family.
Poverty, once an evangelical counsel, must be
exterminated at its source.
Home-made Politique
That professionals do produce spectacular results with
both speed and efficiency within the narrow limits of
their trades is what makes their interference so
difficult to parry. They have more tricks up their
sleeves than Pharaoh’s magicians, and the tricks work.
Whatever the prudent steward can do they can do better.
Montessori’s successes in child engineering can no more
be denied than the ready excellence of the pre-pre-pared
frozen six-course dinner. Few parents have the
intestinal fortitude to run a second-rate home, doing
there quiet, wonderful things worth doing badly in the
very teeth of such excellence.
What begins as an incidental aid soon becomes a chronic
luxury, ending as a downright necessity. Keeping its
nose in the world, the home soon follows its every
scent, “advancing as society advances and changing as
society changes,” according to the best Marxist
principles. Nowhere is this better seen than in the
nursery school syndrome. Good in themselves and useful
in emergencies, in due time pre-schools became
identified with the bourgeois mystique. What began with
Dr. Montessori as a much needed support to the poor
wound up as status symbol for the rich. Nursery schools
generally, along with compulsory education, have for
generations been part and parcel of a latent and
widespread contraceptive mentality. Parents who would
shrink in horror from dropping a family fetus in the
garbage can or dropping it by premeditation through
artificial contraception, have no qualms whatever about
dropping it off at school. Anything to get it out of
the house!
Montessori is about as effective a lasting cure for the
ills of the home as wall-to-wall carpeting. This
over-extended doctor lady, so competent in her field,
provides a good example of how innocent, natural
expertise can lead to the most dangerous—and
silly—aberrations if allowed to go its way unimpeded.
I’m referring to her famous (and oft-cited) fabrication
of a child-sized church with mini-vestments and pews,
whereby children are to be taught to experience
worship. Were true worship a natural pastime like
hockey, this would make sense, but what a way to
introduce a child to the supernatural!
Such an approach nips the sense of awe right in the
bud. How can the child by such means be made aware of
God’s transcendence, of the fact that worship is
essentially a heavenly occupation which in this life
will always be mostly beyond him? A parent with sound
spiritual instincts would do just the opposite: he would
take his child to grand and beautiful churches where
everything is much too big for him. He would make him
aware of his insufficiency.
God knows how much genuine worship has been stifled by
the devilish fad for bringing the liturgy down to the
size and level of the adult worshiper, let alone the
child. If this practice takes root in the home we’re
done for, because the notion of the supernatural will be
destroyed in the very place it should take root. Home
is where we first face the fact that religion demands a
hard pull upward away from ourselves to things beyond
our natural strength and understanding. Deprived of the
reach only awe can elicit, the child is pulled
heartlessly back onto his own puny resources—besides
being ruined by entirely too much attention.
Said Pope Pius XI, “Every other enterprise, however
attractive and helpful, must yield before the vital need
of protecting the very foundation of the Faith and of
Christian civilization.” That was back in 1937. It’s
later than we think, and parents had better get busy
with a good home-made politique before it gets
any later. This is no job for mere professionals. Only
amateurs, lovers, can tackle it
The platform has already been formulated: Our Father
…Thy Kingdom Come. Thy will Be Done On Earth –As It Is
In Heaven. |