As ever, posting on the advisability or otherwise of having a television at home generated quite a discussion. (See the comboxes of Another MSM-free family and Chuck the Telly.I thought it might be worth adding some further thoughts to clarify. I don't think that every family that has a television is necessarily doing harm to their children. Many such as Jackie Parkes, or Francis (cf. combox) use the TV responsibly and with vigilance. But I do want to assert that it is perfectly all right for a family to choose not to have a TV. This is called into question by those who want to say that the television is an essential part of our culture and that a family, or an individual, is missing something important by not having the TV at home.
Nor am I saying that the electronic item itself is an evil. It is possible to view EWTN or good films without falling into the trap of channel-hopping and leaving the set on all the time. However, there are other ways of obtaining such content: via the internet or, in the case of films, by using a projector. A fairly cheap projector is quite suitable for an average living room.
My principal concern is that many families are subjected to a form of cultural bullying. If they make the perfectly reasonable choice to do without a television, they are sometimes cast as misfits or social pariahs. It sometimes disturbs me how many conversations (even among clergy) focus around "that programme last night".
In Britain, we have the particular problem of the licence fee. BBC Resistance quotes M. W. D. Kimball of TV Licensing Customer Services on the conditions under which you need a licence:
"A television licence is legal permission to install and use television equipment to receive or record television broadcast signals. Under the Broadcasting Act 1990, you need a television licence to receive or record television programmes. This applies if you use equipment to receive or record BBC 1, BBC 2, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5, satellite, or cable programs. If you are watching 'Sky', or any other satellite service, controlled from within the UK, you must have a television licence."Note that if you watch a satellite service that is not controlled from within the UK (such as EWTN) you do not need a licence.
Although it is a legal requirement to have a licence to watch, for example, SKY, the revenue from the Licence Fee goes to fund the BBC. Many of us object strongly to having to fund the BBC in this way and this adds a further incentive to get rid of the TV or at least to arrange things in such a way as not to be legally required to pay the Licence Fee.
"Satan's black box?" Some people find this kind of description extremist. I would say that it is legitimate hyperbole. Satan certainly has benefited from the corruption of children through unsupervised television watching, and the (now documented) bias against the Catholic Church and the pro-life movement.
Is the internet just as bad? It can be worse, of course: many boys and men have become addicted to pornography because of its easy availability on the internet and there are many other problems besides. Some religious orders make a point of not using the internet and I respect that. It can be helpful but I would not say that it is essential. At the moment, we are able to use it to circumvent the bias of the mainstream media and to promote Catholic teaching.
The difference, I think, is that the internet is basically pull technology. You decide, you choose. TV has become much more like that with the proliferation of channels but it is very limited by comparison and the barrier to entry for producers is much higher. So for the moment, I'm happy to use the internet but not watch TV. It is not part of my intention to say that everyone should do that, just to encourage those who are standing at the water's edge wondering whether to plunge into a TV-free life. It really won't hurt!
(BTW - I found that graphic of the broken TV over at The Daily Yada: TV-Free August. The (homeschooling) family agreed to do without TV for a month. The children pointed out that Mum did not watch it anyway so it would not be a sacrifice for her. She had to give up sugar!)
35 comments:
Nicely put! & thanks for the vote of confidence. In Miles Jesu they went through a stage of no Internet, but use it wisely as a good tool of evangelisation. naturally that's what we bloggers are hoping to do & i think it is very successful. The only thing is i can clearly see what the family are watching now & although we have only one desk top in the main lounge i wonder if they might see stuff i'd prefer they didn't. Also naturally we have full parental blocks on the TV so they are limited in what they can see..parental blocks on computers don't seem as successful to me.
i hear what you say about the licence though & the BBC infiltration...
i expect the Pope was viewing Italian News on his TV as part of his recreation..which might differ from ours.
Finally i have to say Fr Tim, are you sure this isn't another middle-class affair? i know Joanna B laughs at me.'i work too Jackie!' which is funny. But when i was at Convent school we did know a few 'odd' middle-class families with no TV. Are there any working class no TVers out there?
i'm really gonna get it in the neck now!
I prefer the Eye TV cartoon in private eye :-)
The TV licence thing is something you have to be very careful with. My understanding is that if you possess apparatus that is capable of recording or watching BBC sky etc. then you have to have one.
I have heard that the BBC even attempted to force everyone with the internet to have one on the grounds that some BBC programes are available on the internet.
Its high time the SBC was broken up and abolished (I will leave you to guess what S stands for !)
Paul - they can't actually prosecute you without any evidence that you have broken the law. (I am sure they would like to!) I think the likes of BBC Resistance are the best to advise on this sort of thing.
Jackie - I think that, like the National Lottery, the effect is likely to be more damaging among "working class" people who may have less support in resisting.
I think the whole middle class - working class issue is one that should be studied far more closely in the church.
I fear that in the post concilliar church the drop off in working class attendance at mass is far more severe than in middle class attendance.
I would go so far as to say that the change from the 1962 to the 1970 rite is most significant in this regard.
The middle class love the new rite, they can gush, shake hands become readers and extraordinary ministers, theu can DO things, How wondahful!
Whereas many working class people were comfortable with the old rite where they could attend in silence and quietly pray suddently they had to be talking, all nicely nicey to everyone, shake hands with total strangers and sing things like kum-by-ah my Lord, all things that go totally against the grain with the working class - the men at any rate. Surprise surprise, male working class Mass attendance collapses followed by the rest of their families (something that is painfully obvious in the Liverpool and Salford diosces).
One thing that will be most revealing after September 14th when parishes slowly start putting on the extraordinary rite is how many lapsed catholics come out of the woodwork and attend them. I suspect it will be more than we think.
"Paul - they can't actually prosecute you without any evidence that you have broken the law"
Hi Father, my understanding was that if you were in possession of apparatus capable of showing or recording television programmes then, of the device was connected and switched on, you were breaking the law whether or not you used it for this purpose.
I remember years ago a spate of prosecutions of people with video recorders because they only had black and white TV licences. They only had black and white televisions but because the video recorder was capable of recording colour TV signals they had to have a colour licence.
You can probably make all sorts of exotic defences to a court which may or may not succeed, but it is an expensive and risky hobby and I would not recommend anyone owning a television or video or DVD recorder without a licence without very carefully checking the legal situation.
Many years ago a former colleage was speeding a little going over Hammersmith Flyover when he was overtaken by a car going so fast that it made it seem he was going backwards. A little further on he was stopped for Speeding by the police. He enquired as to why they went after him not the really fast car and was told that "we can't catch him sir because our car is not fast enough but we can catch you". I think this episode just about sums up the attidude to justice our law enforcement agencies have- they will go for the easy life and the easy targets.
I've been trying to understand the "no TV" debate for a while.
I've visited the various websites mentioned by Fr. Tim, and found all the comments facinating to read.
But I'm still unclear what the real objection is to TV (in this country).
Is it about the television set being a bad thing per se ?
I think I mean not only the rubbish which is broadcast on it, but also the hypnotic effect it seems to have on some people, who will watch anything and everything uncritically ?
Which raises the broader question of how best to protect children from it.
(Not a question in my case : I've been a bachelor all my life).
Or is it about the licence fee, and the use/misuse of the revenue from it ?
(I'm bound to say I regard the licence fee in the same light as other imposts : income tax, VAT, council tax, etc., etc.
I pay them, and think "There. That's more money down the drain."
But I'm afraid I don't think about it any more deeply than that.)
Would I think about about where-is-my-money-going, if, say, I had to pay VAT on my books ?
Gosh, I don't know.
I suppose I'm not convinced one way or the other, until someone very kindly enlightens me.
Meanwhile, I presume no one will be shocked if I declare my intention to watch this evening a video of Ronald Colman and Madeleine Carroll in the 1937 film of The Prisoner of Zenda.
Oh, and I did tune in to TV yesterday evening.
It was The Last Night of The Proms from the Albert Hall.
TV:"an essential part of our culture and that a family, or an individual, is missing something important by not having the TV at home".
Not had one since 1998. Never missed it. I listen to BBC R4 a lot; I think I am better informed about what goes on in the world than most of my peers who get their 'news' from off the TV.
I have absolutely loads of things I can talk to you about Father, and I won't say, not once : "Did you see that programme last night..."
True, I do struggle when I see those News paper headlines about certain personalities,fail to recognise the photos. Don't know who that drunken Bimbo is, thank goodness.
William
Oh! Glad i don't do the lottery then!
We're homeschooling parents. We have a TV. We use it for movies--good stories in the form of good art (see the Vatican top 45 films list). I think an analogy can be drawn with alcohol. Instead of being teetotalers, we should model and teach our children how to drink responsibly. Same with media. The Church encourages us to be involved in the production and consumption of media and the arts; we need to model and teach our children how to do this responsibly. They need to be taught the mental and moral effort it takes to filter the good from the bad. This is a skill and a virtue to be acquired. But, like the person who can't handle his liquor, a family who can't handle TV or the internet should give it up completely.
I'm not sure whether we're officially middle class, or working class, husband's a teacher, only one wage, can't afford all those tellys in the bedroom that the "working class" people in the ex council house next door used to have, but we haven't had a lot of support from family for living without telly, we're considered decidedly odd! The grandparents seem to have become desensitised to what is actually being poured forth into their front room, and how it's not all appropriate for children, they've lived with the tv so long they haven't noticed how much filth has crept in. Someone once told us it's like if you put a frog in boiling water it will jump out, if you put it into cold water and gradually bring it to the boil, the thing stays there and gets boiled to death!!
Paul, we've lived without tv for years, and regularly let the tv licencing people know we have a tv which we use for dvd's and videos, and they accept it. Sometimes they check to see whether the box is tuned in to any channel, but as it's never plugged in to an arial, they are always satisfied. The only way they could "get" us is if we actually did watch tv and they detected it, but we don't so there's no problem. One tv licence guy, after visiting us, and being happy with what he saw, started telling us he didn't really agree with the licence fee himself, and could see why people such as ourselves didn't bother watching tv anymore!
Forgive me, but there is one aspect of this discussion that drives me to distraction. After more than fifty years of fifty years of contending with this beast, even the best informed Catholics have NO idea what they are up against. Programming is a problem, of course, but it is not the basic issue. The basic issue is that we are watching, watching, watching.
See The Plug-in Drug by Marie Winn. This book, now updated, has been around since the mid-seventies, I believe. It should be on the must read list of anyone hoping to pry us away from this monster.
Years before reading it, I made the connection which she fully documents. TV came into our homes in the early fifties, and I with millions of my fellow grade school students sat down to watch it. By the late sixties we were in our late teens and early twenties, the generation of 1968, Haight-Ashurby, Woodstock. We had watched thousands and thousands of hours of innocent programming, by and large, utterly passive. But it got to the point where we knew the plot five minutes into the program, could frequently predict the next line of dialogue and were utterly, utterly bored. Drugs were the next logical step, one that many of us took. Of course, there were many other factors in the destruction of our innocence, but TV was a prime factor. And the programming was NOT the problem. The problem was the medium itself.
There are many, many Scripture passages and writings of the saints that point in the direction of ridding ourselves of TV.
For example,when it comes to saving our souls, Our Lord is emphatically an exponent of extremism in a way that applies deliciously to TV: "If your eye is the problem, pluck it out."
Examples could be multiplied ad infinitum, so that an arm chair prophet of the 1950's would have had no difficulty in predicting that if television ever became a force for evil, then obviously the Catholic Church would be the first to rise against it.
Personally, I find it very embarrasing that this has not happened.
No, by far the most energetic, articulate and organized forces against TV have in risen in response to the purely human devastation they have witnessed or experienced.
See for example
www.turnoffyourtv.com
and www.whitedot.com
In 1949 Pius XII issued an allocution on radio and TV in which he pointed out the possible benefits and dangers from these media. The thing that kills me is that he quoted Juvenal, "Nothing impure in the home!" We have not even been able to take to heart and act upon this perfectly reasonable principle of natural law enunciated by a pagan of 2000 yrs ago.
There are many parents who imagine that they are controlling TV in the home, but I wonder how many of them are doing so successfully. In too many cases, I am afraid, they switch the TV off or switch channels *after* the impurity has already entered the home. They are shocked, shocked, shocked that this has happened to them once again. They will write a letter this time! And the children go off to bed not quite the holy and innocent children they were earlier in the evening.
This reminds me, I was at an afternoon of reflection put on by the priests of Miles Christi here in Chicago Saturday afternoon. Among the children there was a beautiful blonde eight year old girl wearing a pink t-shirt with the motto "Holy, pure and innocent child of God" May it be ever thus!
Annoyed by TV in public places, in restaurants, airports and athletic clubs? Is that your trouble, Bunky?
Then pull your stretch socks up out of your shoes, put a smile on your face and reach for
TV B Gone!
Pavarotti's Requiem
The not-too-tenuous link, Father, is that many of us watched the Requiem Mass of Luciano Pavarotti on Italian television on Saturday and, as well as being musically abysmal (the dreaded "UHU" led by a pub singer raising its appalling head during the blessing of the coffin) it contained a shocking, almost Blairite, feature in the liturgy: at the beginning of the Mass, the bishop recited that now-common Catholic litany, the List of Attending Celebrities - made worse by the inclusion of both "moglie" and "ex-moglie".
Well put, Father. The answer, as always, is taking responsibility - in this case parents taking responsibilty (as with the net) and saying "no" where necessary.
I have no idea how most children have chance to watch the hours of telly they are reckoned to - there are so many other things children can do without costing the earth (I am glad to say my boys are never happier than when kicking a rugby ball or a football around a park or playing cricket or reading or being read to or playing board games or - don't let 'Elf 'n' Safety know -climbing trees)
99.9% of TV output is unmitigated rubbish (Deal or no deal, Stars In Their Eyes) or worse, poisonous and corrupting (Big Brother, most daytime chatshows)
That said it is also capable of sublime heights (John Mortimer's adaptation of Brideshead, most David Attenborough documentaries, Kenneth Clark's Civilisation) and I would be a sadder man never to have seen Tommy Cooper or Morecambe and Wise.
England's defence of The World Cup wouldn't be so good on the radio either!
There are some things I'm glad I saw on the telly:
Pope John Paul's funeral; the announcement of Pope Benedict's election; Gareth Edward's try for the Barbarians; Steve Redgrave's 5th gold medal; Man Utd winning the European Cup (and I really don't like Man U); Fawlty Towers; I, Claudius; The World at War; Steptoe and Son; Blackadder.
All that said - these are diamonds among the dung. There's always an OFF switch.
We have always set pretty strict limits on our kids watching the TV at home.
My six 'kids' range in ages from 29 down to 11. The children never watch TV during the week - not even during the holidays. The oldest an architect, is now married and we have a one year old (nearly) grandson. My eldest daughter, a primary school teacher, will hopefully be getting married next year. Next son down (18) is off to university end of this month, my youngest three daughters are in a Catholic secondary school.
When they get home from school/work it's a hive of activity in the house with homework, study, cooking (sometimes), music lessons, swimming (mum and/or dad go too!) or tennis in the park weather permitting. Then there's the garden and all the kids guinea pigs and rabbits to feed, water and clean, books to read, rooms to tidy. Heavens by the time that's all done and the evening family meal consumed in between there never really was time for TV anyway!!!!
Come the weekend the TV is allowed from 8-10am and that's it! Generally the younger ones (11-15 year old) will watch a video or DVD (checked by mum and dad of course). To be honest they rarely even bother watching as there is so much else to do. Occassionally we will all watch a family film ('Grounded' was a good one we all watched together this weekend just gone - set us up for Christmas! Simple daft stuff with lots of laughs.)
As for 'soaps' and the other appaling rubbish on TV, well they and we (my wife and I) simply haven't a clue. Sure the kids are asked if they saw this or that the night before but frankly they've learnt not to be bothered about what their friends think and as they are quite popular in school anyway their friends don't seem to care.
In fact I'll tell you something else - their friends just love to come over to our house and play, or just goof around the garden with a basketball that goes for my 18 year old aswell! They never watch TV but play in the garden, go shopping to the High Street, play games, run guinea pig races, etc... etc... etc...
I believe that by limiting the TV my wife and I have allowed the kids creativity and ability to think for themselves and entertain themselves to flourish. TV without any doubt if left to babysit your kids 24/7 will stunt their creative and intellectual abilities and turn them into unfit couch potatoes. That does NOT set them up well for their life ahead or instill good habits into their lifestyle.
It is all too easy to say a 'TV yes' to the children when the alternative requires effort from you, the parent. But your God given responsibility for which all parents are ultimately accountable, is to sacrifice your time and effort unconditionally for your children. That is something the world has great difficulty with at the moment with abortion sitting at the very pinnacle of a selfish 'me and myself' centred society.
There's a whole world of 'stuff' out there far more stimulating than that stupid box in your living room. It has its uses but sadly it seems to have taken over peoples lives to an extent never forseen, no, not even by the BBC.
Next time you are sitting there in front of the 'devils box' with your children just look at the gaumless empty eyed expressions on everybody's faces and think to yourself 'what else could we be doing now'? Counter culture? You bet, but you and your family will be so much better off for it.
re Pavarotti's Requiem
I DID turn off the telly when I heard the Rossini Choir singing....get ready for this....Eagle's Wings in Italian. They looked a bit ruffled. No doubt a trained liturgist stuck it in without anyone noticing.
Even my non-religious missus said "What the heck is that?" [that at least is the gist of what she said...]
I have been reading the various arguments for and against t.v. with interest as we have 'lived' without t.v. for a year now and have no desire to to have it back. Has anyone else noticed that of all the comments and various anti-t.v. web sites online there seems to be an absence of anyone who having given up t.v. just couldn't stand the deprivation and had to have it back - pronto!
Those who have given up t.v. seem perfectly happy with the decision and find wonderful unexpected benefits. For those who can't comprehend life without t.v. all I can say is try giving it up for Lent and instead of then theorising why life without t.v. is a mistake you will be able to speak from practical experience.
I also used to think that people without t.v. were middle-class oddballs. But that was before the majority of British t.v. programmes reached such a low and depressing standard that I no longer wanted to watch or financially support them anymore.(Remember 'Jerry Springer - The Opera')?
Well, I suppose our decision has now placed us within the ranks of middle-class oddballs Oh well! It has changed our lives for the better in our house anyway.
Jane Shurber
Staffordshire
"Satan's cat flap"
(my co-blogger Aelianus)
(he does watch it though)
What concerns me about getting rid of TV altogether - other than the rebellion it would cause - is this. The children would just go and watch it at their friends houses where you have no control - or are you to censor who their friends are as well?
Sooner or later they will go to the real world, possibly when they go to university and discover 98% of the population do not share their religious views. If the realities of modern life have been kept from them there is a good chance they will flip -either being very unhappy and unable to cope or throwing away their faith and sleeping around - or both.
I have to agree with Keith - this might occasionally mean watching something you might not perhaps want to watch but far better that you do so and explain the context to them that put them through the misery of being excluded from social groups at school because all the other kids are discussing eastenders and they are not allowed to watch it.
IMHO you cannot guide your children away from the worlds errors by hiding them from the world - only by careful guidance and explanation - otherwise you risk a very dangerous grass is greener syndrome.
I think people have to realise the days when you could control what your children get to see are utterly over. This is because of technology and there is nothing anyone can do about it - they can see -and swap - utterly vile things on a mobile phone - in this world you have to educate not censor (obviously within reason).
ah well at least i'm tee-total..never had an alcoholic drink in my life..never missed one either..perhaps that's what it's like with no TV? To be honest i couldn't really give a d**mn (sorry Gone With the Wind there!) of course the kids play in the garden..cricket,tennis,go-karting,football,trampolining, walking our labrador,swimming,music lessons, cubs,scouts,basketball,reading, homework,Daily Mass, Altar Serving, Sacristan duties,Benediction,Holy hours,Rosary recitation,morning & evening Prayer,missionary work at the children's schools,chatting to parents,encouraging the Faith in the lapsed,talking to atheists,speaking & feeding the children's friends,visiting the libraries,museums & Art Galleries,preparing our annual Pilgrimage,fund-raising,cycling,walking as a family..that's for starters..nothing to do with TV there..reading Catholic Literature..adults & children,Lives of the saints..
It astonishes me that nobody in this precious debate has pointed out the inconsistency of using the World Wide Web in relation to abandoning watching television. The Internet is potentially more dangerous, degenerate and corrupting than television. At a flick of the finger you can go from reading the Hermeneutic of Continuity to surfing degenerate sexual sites, atheistic or politically violent ones. You don't have to look at them; you don't have to watch unsuitable programmes. There is infinitely more scope for downloading evil of every description from the Internet than there is on television. Television is subject to control. The Internet appears to be a free for all.
When Satan is invoked in this silly campaign you will discover, if you wish, far more access to evil on the Internet than is yet possible on television. To ignore this glaring reality suggests yet more humbug from Black Fen. Not long ago you showed some clips from a DVD of the daily life of the Holy Father. How did he finish his day? By watching television news with his secretaries. What's good enough for him (and Mrs Parkes)is good enough for the majority of Catholics world wide.
Jackie - actually, I think there is a good analogy between abstinence from alcohol and abstinence from TV. Drinkers will always talk about such and such a good wine or beer and argue that you can enjoy alcohol in moderation. Those who don't drink just don't really worry about that.
Anon - I did discuss the question of the internet and its dangers. Always a good idea to read a post before commenting on it.
Paul wrote, "What concerns me about getting rid of TV altogether - other than the rebellion it would cause - is this. The children would just go and watch it at their friends houses where you have no control - or are you to censor who their friends are as well?"
This concerned me, too, of course, but it is, I discovered, an unreasonable fear. If I am praying for my childfren from day one as if they are Augustine and I am St. Monica, and to put teeth into my prayers, so to speak, I toss the TV, will the Lord let me down by allowing them to fall into a pit of moral slime at someone else's house? NO a thousand times over. I have done everything I could, which as a pledge of sincerity is all the Lord could wish for to come to my aid, to put a bubble around them, as it were. That He did.
"Nothing impure in the home"- that's my responsibility. In guarding and preserving my own hearth, I've done everything in my power to do. On that basis, I can reasonably hope and pray that the Lord will come to my aid. This He will do.
As far as mockery and exclusion goes, in fact, when they were 8 and 10 yrs old I wrote a letter to the local paper in the same vein as I have written here. Apparently it got a few laughs around town ("Hey Marge, listen to this!...")and the word was out that we had no TV. My kids had to undergo all kinds of mockery for this on the school bus. This did them no lasting harm. Perhaps it did them some good.
As their teen age years approached, I braced myself for the usual teenage rebellion, but it never happened. .
Now they have grown into normal, affable, strong and intelligent young adults. Not having TV did not warp them in any way. It kept them from being warped.
Having lived on the dark side for some years in my late teens, forgive me again, but I think it very unlikely that you have sufficient enough a grip on what television producers and advertisers are doing with your mind and that of your child to be able to educate them about it at all. While you are sitting there educating your child, satan is talking over your head in code words your child knows, but you don't, and he is making you look like a total oaf. Yes, I realize that sounds ridiculous, but I have seen it happen with my own father. Every generation has its own slang, its "in" jokes and no one is more hip than the entertainment industry- which is in satan's pocket. When you have the TV tuned to the MSM, you are playing on his turf by his rules, like it or not, and it is very unlikely you will prevail, sorry to say.
As for avoiding the realities of modern life, there is simply no way to avoid them, least of all by throwing out the TV. However, when you throw it out, you have eliminated a very powerful and persuasive advocate for corruption and perversity of every kind.
When they get to university your children will have the pure vision and clean heart to be able to discriminate between good and evil, and hopefully exposure to many good examples of virtuous life.
There is nothing to fear in throwing it out, nothing whatever. There may be wailing and gnashing of teeth for about two weeks, but after that gradually good things, activities and people will begin to fill up what at first looked like aeons and aeons of time.
Just a tip. Rather than making a major announcement and throwing it out with ceremony, I would arrange for the television to have an accident...and never get around to repairing it or replacing it. Use your imagination and "Be not afraid!"
Again, I think that television programming is crap, but I think that there is a lot of merit in watching good films in moderation. Wholesome family movie night once a month--enjoying a film from the Vatican top 45 films list--is something I would add to Mrs. Jackie's list of activities she would have her family do besides watch TV. Because my children don't watch TV or Disney movies, even my youngest ones will not only sit through, but enjoy obscure foreign movies. Mom and I read/paraphrase the subtitles and they are enthralled. And I think they are enriched by it. The next day, after they've had time to digest the film, we talk about what we gleaned from it or enjoyed about it. Film is a powerful art form recognized and elevated by the Church. It's not just entertainment.
"Middle-Class oddballs". Well, I will fess up here and say, if having two academic degrees and a semi-professional job as a social worker makes me 'middle-class', then yes, the cap fits.
I was born into a very working class (almost, 'underclass' in fact) family in Bow. I was brought up with TV, in fact, probably BY the TV! We were routinely stuck in front of the box while mum made our tea or did something else.
I will also confess that initially, my 'decision' to rid myself of TV was no such thing. There was no high-sounding principle involved. I moved from a situation where there was a TV, to my own flat where there wasn't. I fully intended to save my money to buy a new TV. Funny, after even a few short weeks I realised I didn't really miss the 'box'. So I spent the money I had saved on a really decent radio and a few good books. Never looked back!
Funny, but it is actually my colleagues and friends (yes, middle-class everyone) who have the most difficulty with my not having a TV; and who have the most difficulty in carrying out a non-TV related conversation. Now that, my friends is really sad.
Paulinus: The "UHU" to which I referred above is in the fact the opening words of the abysmal "Eagle's Wings" - sorry for being so oblique and I do agree very much with your wife! Father Tim: I propose another thread arising out the other rant I made about Pavarotti's Requiem - the reading out of the celebrant of the List of Attending Celebrities. This is very much the priest as "emcee" to which the Pope refers in his books as well as being a horrible sign of the way in which the Church seems sometimes to cosy up to the rich and famous.
New on Zenit: Benedict XVI Encourages Moviemakers "The Pope's statement said that a world of film production receptive to the transcendent dimension of life and to the mystery contained within the human being, is capable of promoting a true humanism, with values such as hope, fraternity, harmony and peace."
It seems to me on the BBC resistance site that you are still liable for the licence fee even though you use an extra-UK satellite system. Some clarification is needed.The BBC resisantance site is good, a bit of a gloomy aura to the site, though.
Ken
Paulinus: The "UHU" to which I referred above is in the fact the opening words of the abysmal "Eagle's Wings" - sorry for being so oblique and I do agree very much with your wife!
It's not that you're being oblique, it's that I'm a bit thick - too much telly, probably.
As for agreeing with my wife, well, it's usually the best policy....
Why thanks Keith! i may have forgotten at least a dozen things we do as a family..it was a very brief list..but as for watching the Vatican's top films..of course we do that as a matter of course..my children know the Lourdes & Fatima stories intimately..from the ages of 2 or 3 they learn about the lives of the saints all having their favourites..Lee..my adult children choose their friends very carefully indeed ( i do have one or 2 renegades! i might add in case anyone thought we were the Waltons!) But this child/ren has been brought up the same as the others..we all have free will).
My eldest is training to be a doctor & the second reading English..she has a brilliant mind.
i suppose what i'm saying is how many of you have negotiated 10 children through adolescence..one or two (i know not everyone has the great gift of fertility we had)is just no comparison to 10 or 12.
Not sure what this has to do with TV! Except to say that all my children are chaste, even if they watched the odd Big Brother!So it didn't encourage them to sleep around, because they can see how ridiculous the characters are. i wonder if those not watching TV might be up to something else? Joke! People always say to me 'Don't you have a TV?' When we say we have 10 kids..i mean we're not sex mad..or then again, that would make a good topic, Fr Tim, Catholics & Sex. (Are you really gonna post this!)
That's a strange thing for Mrs Jackie Parkes to say about the children not watching tv being up to "something else". What does she mean by that - even if it is meant to be a joke? She seems very defensive about having a tv. If she has full parental blocks on viewing how come the children have watched Big Brother? Is that considered family entertainment in her home! Perhaps those episodes have not had an obvious affect on her children yet,(presumably they haven't all grown up and left the nest) but the fact that any Catholic family has allowed such a program to be aired in their home, which should be a holy place, whether out of prurient interest or as an intellectual educational exercise, should be seen as rather disturbing. Satan really does want to enter good Catholic people's homes.
Maria.
Thanks Maria..i'm not in the least disturbed but appreciate your concern.yes the over 14 year olds watched the odd episode of Big Brother..my PP said he'd rather have his finger nails pulled! i can't really see our kids suffering from Satan's plans more than those without TV. i'm not particularly defensive & am quite comfortable with our decision..i re-iterate that the computer is worse. We were able to discuss the racist issue.etc..the girls have told me it is c**p so they're not stupid.
Really we need to see how many young adults who practice their faith (mine all do) have watched TV. i just haven't seen the evidence from homeschoolers or no TV watchers...they seem to lapse or go off the rails in equal numbers ..i actually think more than those that watch TV. Perhaps they're ill-prepared when going to University..mine at Uni actually don't have TVs..you see they can take it or leave it..no big deal..that's much healthier to my mind. On Fr Tim's discussion i always end up being the only TV watching mom of 10..on my own blog a lot of the Catholic moms of large families share my views..so perhaps my circumstances are a world away from those on this blog...
Perhaps because of all the above i am a little defensive..not surprising really..so won't be posting anymore on this topic...i've got too much TV to watch! Not!
Well, since Jackie won't be posting anymore on this topic, I guess the field is all mine.
Nevertheless, Jackie, if you do pop in, I absolutely don't get the logic that justifies TV by "the computer is worse." Worse is the comparative form of bad. Bad is bad whether or not worse is worse. If TV is bad, then no TV is better, obviously, a point which I am sure you would grant if you were posting on this topic. Not only that, but you will have to admit that if your children get up from watching TV and walk over and sit down at the computer, then they have gone from bad to worse.
And where was their mother while all this was happening? Blogging!!! Sorry, Jackie, I couldn't resist ;)
Post a Comment