Fundamental Differences

Several years ago, (many, in fact....too many...) just after my graduation from college while I was still a young, naive and gung-ho-feminist-gonna-be-cop with an attitude, I had the undeserved grace to work with a couple of guys who weren't afraid to be men.

I didn't realize at the time that they spoke a very solid, theological truth to me; after all, what an unlikely source! As I came to learn, though, they served to prove that God designed men and women very differently from each other, and to recognize those differences is not demeaning; rather, it glorifies God and sanctifies us all with the dignity God intended us to have.

You may be asking what wonderful truth these raggedy, trash-talkin', conceited tough-guy stereotypical men imparted to me?

I'm glad you asked!

One winter night we went out on the town and had a few brewskis and a few shots. I was a new addition to the management of our department (with them), and apparently that night at the bar was my "initiation" of sorts. We had worked together for a couple years, but my promotion was recent, and with my promotion, they finally had the freedom to tell me what they really thought.

That night I enjoyed their friendly, if challenging company, and was happy to be "one of the boys" which was a role I was used to filling.  In my college years, the reality was that most of my friends were guys. I could relate to them easily, and they liked me because I liked things such as weapons and learning hand-to-hand combat. And if someone got into my face, I was not real willing to back down.

Also, I could drink Tequila straight from the bottle and swear not just a sailor, but a pirate right under the table. I'm no longer proud of that gift, nor am I capable of it anymore, but at the time it endeared me to my male counterparts. At least to a professional degree.


(Aside: That's the irony of working with men in some fields...what is unprofessional in some crowds is professional in another).

Anyway, that evening as we waited for our next round of shots, we discussed women in Law Enforcement (a very personal topic for me), and we discussed women in the military. I was all for sending women into combat; I was a strong advocate of women in any and every role and made no bones about it. My male colleagues disagreed. One of them because, as was my impression, had been raised by a chauvenist pig and so became one, and the other arrived at his opinion from the point of view from his indoctrination as a Marine, Special Forces.

 In either case, my instinct was to completely disregard their old-fashioned archaic oppressive opinions as worthless drivel.

Just the same, those guys' words have never left me, as much as it used to pain me to admit it. 

The first thing I thought of when I learned about the Theology of the Body was the conversation I had with my   male friends that night. Pope John Paul II, had he been present with us, would have been nodding along with them while they told me about the facts regarding men and women.

Those guys explained very candidly that men have a natural instinct to protect women.

They agreed that women can indeed defend themselves, can do many or most of the same jobs men do, but women have to work harder to do it. (This was a lesson that came home to me about five years later when I trained for and was hired by the Fire Dept.) Their acquiescence to the idea that women had abilities, however, differed from their argument, for ultimately, they weren't talking about doing...they were talking about the foundation of BEING!

Carefully, trying to help me understand, these guys, these friends and co-workers of mine tried to explain that  (in a combat, law enforcement, firefighting situation) even though men realize women don't want any help if they are struggling with a task, men will still want to help them. Thus, in a combat situation, men will instinctively put themselves, and even other men at risk in order to help a woman, even if she is a soldier fighting alongside them. They will do it for the good of their unit, for the good of their country, for the good of the woman...possibly to the detriment of all.

I refused to see his logic and tried to argue that we women don't WANT protection, and we don't NEED protection. I was missing the point...he was attempting to explain to me that it wasn't about what women wanted...it was about how men are designed and that no matter how much they tried, they could not suppress their internal instinct to protect the women around them.

This argument went on for hours. Literally. It went on all night.  I had lost it from the beginning but refused to let it go. My friends finally gave up, realizing that I simply was not going to see reality, and really wasn't even trying. I was too busy holding onto an ideology that saw human biology as "unjust".

The only problem was this: I HAD begun to see it their way, but I simply would not admit it or give up my feminist perspective. It was easier to hold on with all my might to what I wanted to believe, that which would serve my own personal ideology, than it was to look to the expertise of these men who had real-life experience to back up what they were saying.

One of them spoke from experience in combat, but was prohibited from giving examples as his examples were classified. The other spoke from a heart he didn't want anyone to know he had.  Both, in practice, were really a couple a jerks, but both, also, were real men who understood the fundamental differences between the sexes; differences I was afraid to acknowledge for fear it would make me less than I tried to be.

In the end, I learned the lesson the hard way, and only through understanding it have I come to embrace the Truth. I don't regret my foray into Law Enforcement or Firefighting, and I still support women's presence there, for women do bring a particular charism to the Job. However, I do advocate that women who take that route understand who they are, their limitations, and the limitations of the men with whom they work.

Men and women are NOT the same, but are designed to be complimentary to one another, for the good primarily of the family, secondarily to society.

I realize this post may be a catalyst to a greater discussion, and I welcome it so I will stop my position here.  Are there readers with differing positions?  Are there those who speak from experience who agree or disagree?  Are there those who seek clarification, or any who would like to add another facet in the interest of discussion?
*

The combox is open. I am truly interested in what my readers have to offer on this topic.
As a reminder, I do not allow anonymous comments. Make up a handle to identify yourself. Thank you.

Take Up Your Spear

There's maybe something in the wind these days, a sort of discontent among the women of this diocese. There's something amiss, and quietly, some of us have been talking, conniving (as women can do so well) and realizing that we're not alone in our thoughts and desires.

There is something in this diocese that men have, and it excludes women. I might add that it excludes women for good reason, and we do not desire to encroach upon their sacred ground, for what they have, they desperately NEED for themselves and it is doing incredible things in building the Kingdom of God.

Yet, there's something missing; there is no counterpart for women.

I know some of my readers are scratching their heads right about now, wondering what on EARTH I could be talking about? Have I gone insane? (Well, it's possible, but that shouldn't be a new question.) Am I talking about the priesthood? No. I am now and will continue to be a strong advocate of the infallibly-taught-belonging-to-the-deposit-of-faith all-male Priesthood.

Then WHAT?!

Ladies, you've probably noticed the lack yourself, even if you can't put your finger on it. Look around at all the pious church lady offerings in your own parish. What do you see? Of course there are very good and laudable volunteer opportunities that require both men and women, in the parish and in organizations supported by the parish. That might mean working in the kitchen or making blankets for Birthright or Holy Family Adoption Agency. Great stuff!

But look further. Look at the "spiritual formation" opportunities designed for women, and "recreational activities" through the different women's organizations. What do you see?

More of the same. Some speaker comes in to talk about what true feminism is, and it's designed mostly for mothers and families and longevity in marriage. All well and good. That fills a niche, but it doesn't appeal across the board, does it? Or what about the things that are supposed to be "fun"? What do they involve? Scrapbooking, needlepoint, recipe sharing, cookie swapping....UGH!

Sorry y'all, but I'm too bored to go on. I'm glad that some people enjoy those hobbies, but what I really wanna know is this: where's the paintball? Where's the skiing? Where's the snowmobiling out at someone's farm by the state park? Where's the ADVENTURE? Where is Father Corapi or Father Barron or...someone name a great orthodox female speaker? Where is the REAL spiritual formation? Why are women left with fluff while men get all the good stuff?????

Every time I look at the female saints in the Church, I see women who were ON FIRE with love for God, and they weren't afraid to defend the Faith. They weren't afraid to speak out and they gladly and joyfully went to some truly awful forms of martyrdom.

I'm not slamming simplicity. I'm all for simplicity, and holiness in the small things. And all of us are called to that.

But some of us need more than that, and truly, our times DEMAND more of us.

Ah, now I'm getting to the meat of this post. Are you intrigued? Are you bored to death with "women's stuff" at your parish? Would you like something that feeds your fiery spirit and desire to defend your faith?

Well, ladies, maybe something is coming. But it's going to take prayer, it's going to take work, it's going to take organization, and it's going to require a really solid solid faithful holy advisor.

How many of you are familiar with the Argument of the Month Club? For those who are not, this is a club for men only, they have awesome meals, they witness great debates and have the opportunity to challenge the debators at the end of the evening. This event is drawing anywhere from 200-400 men each month! This is incredible! This is awesome! God bless them!

But you know what, there's a lot of women who want the same thing. And I'm not talking about some fluffy "speaker" who comes in to teach us how to make silk flowers. NO! I'm talking about getting those same kinds of speakers as invited by AOTM to discuss hard-core issues and in so doing, teach us how to defend our faith more effectively, give us a chance to step up to the plate (literally and figuratively), and discover that we have more to offer God and the Church than just needlepoint and crafts. Ladies we have VOICES and we love the Church...shouldn't we be a lot more vocal in that love for Christ? Isn't apologetics part of our baptismal requirements, too?

Of course we don't have to be a clone of the men's club; we are women, after all and certain elements may not suit us. But for the tomboys among us, of which there are many, perhaps it's time to answer this particular Call. We need a similar women's organization.

Some of us are kicking around the idea of starting this club. I don't know where it will go. Certainly it can't depend upon me, especially given I can't organize myself out of a wet paper bag ripped open on each end. But I sure can ADVERTISE, can't I? Oh, and you'll NEVER see me upon the platform speaking...I'm not a debater, either.

*

So, ladies everywhere, please keep this intention in your prayers. It might go somewhere, it might not. It depends upon the Holy Spirit. Everyone knows that if He isn't involved, it will fall flat. As I understand it, someone tried to start a club at some point in the past and it didn't "take" so no longer exists. Maybe it was timing. Maybe it was lack of marketing (I certainly had never heard of it). In any case....is NOW the time?

Who's with us?

La Llorona

Ah, this is a tragic, tragic tale.

There are a few versions to La Llorona and I will let you search the web for them. I see that there is a movie that links her to the story of La Malinche, for, as we all know, legends take on a life of their own. As it is, I suggest you search out the term yourself and see what you find. I will try to piece it together here in a simplistic way:

Most legends of La Llorona (Weeping Woman) begin with the beauty of a young Mexican woman who catches the attention of a noble man, and in fact, men of both wealth and poverty. Predictably, she becomes the concubine of a wealthy man, possibly a Spaniard, and bears him two sons. Some stories suggest she already had her two sons when she met the nobleman with whom she fell in love.

In any case, the man is tempted either back to Spain or at least to live out a more "noble" calling by marrying a woman of higher privilege...maybe one without children. In some legends, he is a man whom, she believes, hates children and finds them an obstacle. In other legends, he has already fathered children by a noblewoman whom his family has convinced him to marry. In either case, La Llorona, as the scorned woman, is so distraught that she believes that if she is without children she will become the cherished bride she has always desired to be, and so she takes her infants and stabs them in the heart, dropping them into the river where she cries out in distress, "Mis Hijos!"

And still she is rejected by her lover, the death of her children was a vain sacrifice to the altar of convenience and selfishness.

"MIS HIJOS!"

There are other legends that tell a similar tale, but one more tame. In this other version, the sons of La Llorona played by the riverside in the evening while she cavorted with the men who so desired her beauty. And in her neglect, unsupervised, they found themselves without assistance in their boyhood games and, tragically, were drowned.

The final outcome of all the legends has the distraught mother weeping and wailing at the riverside for her lost children. Yet, she isn't crying through innocent loss, but her direct involvement in their deaths, whether through negligence or her own hand.

In the end, she took her own life, and to this day wanders the riverside, weeping and wailing for her lost children, seeking them eternally.

Mexican and American Southwestern folklore has La Llorona seeking her own children, a malevolent spirit wandering the riverbeds, digging in the mud but willing to swipe living children from the hands of other neglectful parents who allow their progeny to wander alone in dangerous areas, especially at twilight where the Xtabay also lingers seeking to devour lost souls.

Pondering La Llorona

I can't ever read this particular folklore without thinking of the reality she lives every day, in the women who so willingly slaughter their children...and in those who stand up and declare the morality of abortion.

When I hear or read the word "abortion", I see and hear La Llorona, weeping and wailing for her lost children.

I remember the laws recently passed in Mexico, and wonder how a culture that has La Llorona and Our Lady of Guadalupe so ingrained within it, which so IDENTIFIES it, can find the abomination of abortion to be compatible so as to be made LEGAL?

I don't understand how on one end so many in Mexico and America can give witness to the Legend of La Llorona and to the pregnant belly of Our Lady Of Guadalupe with the unborn infant Jesus, and how a culture so Matriarchal and so aware of the spectrum and battle for human life can, in the end, adopt the culture of Death.

I don't understand.

Can't the people, EVERYWHERE hear La Llorona crying in agony for her lost children?

Can't we hear the cries of ruptured infants, crying for their mothers, crying for their fathers who would ALLOW such destruction? Can we hear the cries of La Llorona's drowning children?

SHOULD we care for the cries of the selfish Llorona? Or should we leave her to Perdition?

In Jeremiah 31:15 we read:

Thus says the LORD: In Ramah is heard the sound of moaning, of bitter weeping! Rachel mourns her children, she refuses to be consoled because her children are no more.

The Legends of La Llorona reveal her as a woman with unbound hair, a woman of sin, weeping among the banks of Mexican rivers. When I drew my picture of La Llorona, though, I drew her in union with the Blessed Mother, who weeps for all her children.

When I ponder the story, of the woman in sin, I also hear the echoes of Sacred Scripture that point to Redemption.

In the Eighth Station of the Cross, (Luke 23) Jesus meets the weeping women.

"Weep not for Me," He tells them, as He bleeds upon their sandals, and their tears mingle with His blood, "But for your yourselves and for your children."

Our Blessed Mother wept for her Son, whom she gave up to the Cross on our behalf.

Our Lord bade the weeping women to weep NOT for Him, but...but for their own sins and those they inflicted upon their progeny, for if they could not first weep for what they lacked in themselves, how could they ever have children to mourn? Can life come out of death?

At the foot of the Cross, Jesus gave His Mother to us all, and so she weeps not for Him, who is our Savior and hers, but for all, especially those who do not weep for the right reasons. Our Lady wanders among us, crying her tears as she snatches us not to a watery grave, but to the eternal water that means life for eternity, to the ever-flowing blood of the Cross that warrants redemption, for the oil that is the Holy Spirit that empowers her children to bring life, not death, into the world.

My La Llorona shown above with a veil similar to Our Lady's, is also a tragic figure, but one who seeks out those who sacrifice their children on false altars, knowing what it is to allow true sacrifice for ultimate Redemption.

When I look at the La Llorona of folklore, I see the world as it is, a world that refuses Hope. But when I consider her under the mantle of Our Lady, I realize that even La Llorona does not weep in vain, for she is only one of those who meet Jesus as He carries His Cross, and in her weeping, helps to unite us all with our bloody Bridegroom.

Women's "Ordination" is Preposterous

I've written before on the absolute idiocy of advancing the idea of "priestesses" in the Catholic Church, but this week something else really struck me. The fact is...the Church doesn't exclude women, but rather...She excludes MEN!

** skip down for the focus of this post. The following is actually just background.***

The people trying to advance the feminist agenda firstly have NO IDEA what the Church really is. They don't understand her. They are at odds with everything she teaches and don't even realize why we call her "Holy Mother Church." Even if they use the term, they do so out of a deep misunderstanding which could be corrected if they would simply be open enough to Truth to truly learn something outside of the box within which they've hidden themselves.

There was a time that I thought it would be ok to have female "priests", although I actually wasn't a practicing Catholic and didn't know my Ecclesiology, either. I also hadn't read the Vatican II documents, had NO IDEA what they said, or what the 1st Vatican Council declared, or the Council of Trent...etc., etc. etc. And in fact, I'm STILL learning. It takes TIME to learn.

And a little dose of humility, I guess. I had to learn I was wrong and suck it up. I had to listen to logic, to objective facts, and allow the Holy Spirit to change my heart. It didn't happen overnight. It won't for the dissidents of today, either.

Don't give up on them. Pray for them.

Back to the topic: "Womynpriestesses"

The charge many level against the Church is that she is "oppressive" and "patriarchal" and "male-dominated" and "exclusive". They say she isn't "welcoming" to women.

I've written on this before, a few times.

The fact that people make this charge reveals not that the Church is evil, but that those making such a claim are ignorant as to what scripture reveals and the Divine Revelation passed on to us through the Magisterial teachings of the Church which are...by the way...Apostolic.

Books have been written about this, so I'm going to make only a few points, a la Summa:

On Common Objections to the Church as she relates to Women:

Objection 1: The Church excludes women. Women have no place in the Church.

Objection 2: The Church had a female deaconate and I see no reason why that shouldn't be revived.

Objection 3: The Church is Patriarchal

On the Contrary: All of the above objections are made out of ignorance or simply misunderstand proper context.

I answer that: People who make such claims have a burden of proof upon them to prove their case and not a single one has actually been successful. Those who try find the Truth ultimately abandon the lies they hold so viciously and dearly to themselves, and, surprised by immense joy and freedom, they enter into the Church as true Sons and Daughters. It is truly beautiful to behold someone set free.

Reply to Objection 1: Anyone who would claim that women have no place in the Church clearly don't darken the door of their local parish very often. Women run EVERYTHING, from finance committees, to liturgy commissions, are involved in every single overuse of the word "ministry" and then some, are highly visible, and in fact, it's like pulling teeth to get men involved in anything that isn't recreational. Why? Because women are in the way doing everything and bragging that no matter what it is, they can do it better. No, I'm not making this up. Some parishes are better than others in that regard, however.

On the Theology end, this objection raises the very obvious reality that someone who would say such a thing reveals willful ignorance at worst, or brainwashing by bad "scholars" at best.

The fact is, the Church is feminine. Catholicism is a very sensual religion; consider the scents (incense, beeswax candles, flowers, pine in winter, etc.), textures, colors, stained glass, sacred art, sacred music (not modern music but sacred music), spirituality....it all exudes femininity. And that's all on the surface! Catholicism is in what we can observe in all of our senses, and all of that draws us into something that transcends our very being!

St. Jerome famously said, "Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ!" He is right! And it goes even deeper...to know Christ, one must know the Church, and one cannot know the Church without a proper reading of scripture!

The Old Testament faith introduced the marriage theology of the Church, which was profoundly revealed in the New Testament in Luke, in the Gospel of John (Wedding at Cana, the foot of the Cross), and in Revelation, as well as in the writings of Paul, among others. We see the "Woman" introduced to us in Genesis flowing throughout the scriptures, finding her place in the Great Mothers, in many women of great valor, in the psalms, all revealing Israel not by honoring patriarchy...but by honoring Israel as a woman.

In a deep study, that "woman" is revealed to be Mary, who joins the Old and New Covenants, who stands in the place of the Church under the New Covenant, and we find that if we don't understand Mary...we don't fully understand Christ. She points to Him, and...He binds with US!

WE are the Bride of Christ, a holy nation, Daughter Zion, the New Jerusalem, as foretold throughout the Old Testament! The Church by her very nature and being is feminine! Everything ABOUT the Church is feminine!

We can hack her hair off and strip her of her garments, we can make the Church look "butch" to the outside eye, but we can't change her intrinsic beauty, we can't violate that which cannot be violated for she is under the protection of her spouse, the Holy Spirit.

To suggest that the Church has no place for women is to fail to understand that the Church IS Woman, men and women alike. Yes...in the Church, men are Brides, too. Together, we are all Brides of Christ and that marriage union with Him takes place when we consummate the Holy Sacrifice at Holy Communion.

And we profane our lover, our Bridegroom, when we receive Him in a state of mortal sin.

How, exactly, is the Church exclusive of women when everything She is about is...feminine?

Reply to Objection 2: Indeed, the early Church had female "diakonos" (I might have spelled that wrong, readers please correct my spelling.) Today that word is read as "deacons" or "deaconate", and yes, it's true such people served the early Church and that some were women. However....to suggest that they were the same as our Ordained Deaconate today is, again, a statement belonging to ignorance, not scholarship.

In the early Church, Baptisms were done by full immersion, if my understanding is correct. Women were conscripted to protect the modesty of other women and to serve in other ways. In fact the word "Diakonos" meant "servant" and did NOT indicate ordained ministry.

There has NEVER been record in the Catholic Church of women being ordained. Using a word that has developed a new meaning over thousands of years, and applying a modern definition to history to support modern misunderstanding is intellectually dishonest.

As an aside, it is also fallacious to suggest that Christ COULDN'T make women priests; the fact was that the pagan cultures ran rampant with women "priestesses" and they were actually involved in temple prostitution and fertility rites. Contrast that with the dignity the Church recognizes of Women today, that we are not here for men's pleasure but rather, that we reflect the image and likeness of God.

Get down on your knees and thank Our Lord for saving us from a culture that used us and threw us away to be left or dead, or used us and stoned us to death!

Reply to Objection 3: Indeed, the Church is Patriarchal, in the sense that Christ in His Divine wisdom instituted an all-male priesthood, and consequently, as it belongs to the deposit of the Faith, Tradition, and the reality of our theology, the Church does not have the authority to ordain women.

Christ didn't will a female priesthood, and it would make no theological sense to have one. It's not up for discussion, nor will it ever be so. It IS an infallible teaching. Period.

The fact is, in looking at the totality of the Church, the ONLY thing that belongs to men at all is the Sacrament of Holy Orders! That's it! That's all they get!

If we are to be honest, we have to see that if ANYONE is excluded in the Church...it's MEN!

If the Church is to be fruitful, She NEEDS the Patriarchy, the male priesthood, which stands in for Christ, the Bridegroom. A woman cannot stand in the place of Christ for she cannot be a Bridegroom. She cannot offer the Sacrifice of the Cross, she cannot be Christ. She is designed to be maternal, not paternal, just as the Church is designed to be maternal and receive the Word, and bear it out to the world. It belongs to men to deliver the Word to the receptive Bride.

We come full circle to the marriage theology of the Church, which can ONLY be fulfilled and expressed through an all-male Priesthood and feminine Church.

**

My friends, ignore the cries of the blind who cry out that they are "oppressed" by the Church: the only oppression they suffer is their refusal to open their eyes and see, open their ears to hear, open their hearts to God's love. They are stuck in Isaiah, living the "life" of a disobedient and adulterous Israel, giving themselves to political alliances, disdaining trust in God and obedience to His Commandments.

The Church isn't oppressive; she is Maternal. She is our Holy Mother, in whose arms we take refuge, there, with her under the shadow of the Cross. The Cross is Salvation; anything outside is real oppression.

The ONLY thing that makes sense is a male-only Priesthood! To allow women, Our Lord knew, would destroy the Covenant and make His Bride into the Harlot of the Pagan cultures from which He came to save us.

God our Father is faithful to Himself and to His Covenant; if we choose to disobey, we leave the Covenantal relationship behind, we leave the Marriage of the Lamb, and we become nothing more than pagan prostitutes worshiping idols in meaningless fertility rites that deny our final end and bar us from eternal beatitude.

If you believe in women's ordination, support it, take part in it...it is YOU who leave the Church. SHE hasn't left YOU. Why would you ever leave your Mother in order to make a false idol in your own image?

***************************

Commenting Policy: I allow anonymous comments. For the sake of courtesy, sign some kind of name, which blogger gives you the option to enter without being registered. If you behave like a Troll, you'll be deleted and no, I don't have to justify that decision. My blog, my rules, my judgment. Disagree if you'd like, but don't be a jerk about it.

Judith and Esther

Are Judith and Esther not only typologies of Mary, but perhaps of Mary and Martha as well?

As I study for my Mariology class, I am reading again about Judith and Esther and their roles in history, their valor as women of God, and their very differing individual roles.

As we read the Old Testament, we can't read it one-dimensionally but must see how it is revealed in the New Testament. Although the Bible is one story of salvation as a whole, it is one with untold depths. As we read through history and see how the words of the prophets addressed the people of that age, they also pointed to a Messaiah of the future, and a Woman who would bring him and their entire salvation about.

All of Heaven Held its breath.....

It is said that all of Heaven held their breath as they awaited Mary's fiat, and so it was, as we go back into history and consider the roles of Judith and Esther, who stood as full representatives of their people, standing in the place of Israel; of Daughter Zion.

In the book of Judith, she was recognized as a holy woman, a woman of importance, and so they allowed her to approach the enemy as she and they prayed. In her action involving great prayer and sacrifice, she was able to carry out the action that freed the Israelites from oppression and redeemed them from the enemy. It was God who did the real work, but at her very hands at the behest of the prayer of her and her people.

In the book of Esther, we see how Esther was set aside to save her people in her three days of prayer and contemplation, of suffering and sacrifice. There, in her very humility and weakness, her people were saved as she interceeded for them and continued to do so until they were established in their rightful place.

Both women are seen as types of Mary, just as Isaac and Joseph are seen as types of Jesus in the Old Testament. The New Testament doesn't reveal anything so new, but only brings to fulfillment what has always been true and will continue to be true for all the ages.

Mary and Martha?

I have continued pondering these historical women and suddenly I saw the parallel between these pairs of women in both the Old and New Testaments; they really aren't so different.

In our modern age Mary and Martha have been juxtaposed as examples of the active and contemplative lives of women religious; it seems Judith and Esther can be as well.

In the case of Martha, we see Judith, both women focused on the action to be taken, and action accomplished. Mary and Esther, though, are focused on the need for prayer and contemplation, no matter what the task at hand. While the New Testament women weren't dealing with outright violence, it was because the Sacrificial Lamb was in their very presence, taking that need for violence out of their tender hands so that it could rest in His own, leaving the essence of their respective Calls to be discerned and lived out in a way more ordered than that of their predecessors.

My Own Discernment

I don't think it's any mistake that I was drawn to read deeply of Judith and Esther this summer as I approached the lives of Mary and Martha in that common "translation" of their lives in relation to Christ.

I have had to question myself; what draws me to each woman, how do I identify with her, and what puts me off? What does this reveal about God, about Jesus, about Mary...and about me?

What does this have to do with my own Vocation?

Is Jesus calling me to one of these, each a life of prayer and sacrifice, or something else?

Does it say something that I am more drawn to Esther than I am to Judith, in spite of the expectation I had in starting out that Judith seemed more in line with my own thinking and experience?

So Many Questions

There are those who want me to "Make a decision and just DO IT!"

I know that there are a few of you holding such a position and I gather that from comments, emails, personal conversations, and just the general tone of comments people love to make both with regard to what I've written over the last few years and comments made on the blogs or articles of other men and women in discernment.

We live in a culture of immediate gratification, and if someone is not decisive on the spot, we are tempted to want to push them along according to our own whims, all on their behalf of course!

If there is one thing I learned this summer it was to listen to God and trust in HIS timing. Not mine. Not yours. Not anyone's.

God's timing.

Had I "made a decision" before this summer, it wouldn't have been a good experience. That's why it didn't happen. If I was FORCING a decision now, I know it wouldn't end well.

My last retreat, my visit with the Cistercians, brought God's own words home to me very clearly:

"Wait for Me."

This is where I find the common translation of Mary and Martha to be lacking, and where I fail to see a dichotomy between Judith and Esther.

It is not a rebuking of action vs. contemplation, or this woman's style vs. that woman's style.

In true Catholic understanding, I see both/and...and more.

At my retreat, I brought everything to Jesus, pouring myself out to him, without emotion, but in complete purity, bare before him. I had no devotions to hide behind. As I knelt in that sparse chapel, before the altar the tabernacle, and the red-lit candle, it was me alone, naked in my solitude and honesty.

God was as honest with me as I was with Him. I said I wasn't ready.

He agreed.

I was there BECAUSE I wasn't ready. The healthy don't need a physician.

Judith and Esther didn't act on their own accord. Although they reacted to the need of their people and to those who called for help, they did not leap to a conclusion and "make a decision."

They prayed. They waited.

Judith let Holofernes fall into his own sin after her three days of prayer and fasting before she took the action she was there to take.

Esther's uncle Mordacai was clear in why he thought she was there, and AFTER her three days of prayer and fasting, she, too, took action in a totally different form.

God was a part of that. God DROVE that decision. God was WITHIN that decision and it was HE who delivered His people, for He is present in His annointed.

In Genesis, God created the world in six days, but on the seventh, He rested.

We do not know the length of those days, and we know that the length of the days of prayer for Judith and Esther correspond to the days of Christ's Passion and Resurrection.

Yet that time is symbolic for us today, too. We must all pass through a time of purification, a time of death, a time of resurrection, even here on this earth. Perhaps we pass through this kind of conversion many times, maybe in small ways, maybe in large ones. Maybe it takes three days of a TEC retreat, or maybe it's three years or ten years of hard living, serious suffering, and a breakthrough in a 20-year Confession and learning to live again through the Sacramental life of the Church.

The Saints write of two major conversions, yet I write here of something smaller, something unnnoticed to anyone but to God, for we, and all the Saints, know that there are many steps to holiness, both big and small. Dramatic or inane, they are all the same to God.

The small moments pass without notice to anyone but to us and to God; for God sees how we put our greatest effort into the smallest things, and the smallest, most unnoticeable things are those that make the greatest difference later on.

Holding Pattern

Right now, I am Judith, praying and fasting, asking her people in turn to pray and fast before she goes into the camp of the enemy. I am Esther, face-down in my chamber, prostrate before the Lord, begging for help, revealing my solitude and my dependence upon Him, for I have no one else but Him.

And in this prayer, God is asking me to wait. I'm not ready.

It is not I who says so, but God, and I can do nothing but obey.

I struggle between the worlds of active and contemplative, trying to figure out not only what God wants, but what I want, for this IS an important question.

Only in prayer can it be resolved, and only in prayer can action be discerned. Not on my time, but God's.

He has a plan. I await that plan.

It doesn't have to make sense to me, for right now, NONE of this does.

It certainly doesn't make sense to YOU nor should it, for you are not privy to our private conversations, just as you are not privy to how Judith and Esther each made their own decisions; those facts are hidden. What they heard from God; hidden.

So it remains that part of my life is hidden from you, as it should be, for my discernment doesn't belong to you, but rather, to me and to My Lord who calls me to this state of earthly limbo.

I do not mean, through this, to compare myself in any way to these great Holy Women, for I cannot compare, but only use their stories to explain yet another facet of Mary, of the Church, and of all those discerning God's will in their lives, and certainly in mine. They have much to teach ALL of us.

For now I reach out for their hands, ask for their intercession, realizing that our battles are the same, although on a different spiritual plane.

The mystery of any Vocation is that it comes from Christ alone, and only He and the soul being addressed truly understand the depths that must be plumbed, the mountains to be climbed, and the plains to be crossed in order to respond and fulfill that call.

Judith and Esther both knew that clarion sound that echoed in their souls; I await my own action, clothed in sackcloth, armed with a sword, ready to release all and surrender to the golden scepter when I am brought into countenance of the Lion of Judah, the Lamb of God, both in one....my King.

*

Am I Oppressed?

I continue to come across blog posts, online comments, and real-life discussions delving into the "role of women" and condemning the position of the Catholic Church, claiming that the Church is "oppressive" and even "treats women as sex objects."

It is absolutely astounding and heartbreaking to me that someone would so misunderstand and even outright twist the teachings of the Church to support such a position, for claiming such is nothing but an outright lie.

I've written before about how I used to be a feminist, and I fully admit that I am STILL a feminist, but one with the original understanding going back thousands of years...and this doesn't mean what YOU might think it means.

In Brief:

To recap a little for those who aren't familiar with my story, I went to college for Law Enforcement, did become a Police Officer for a time, and have worked since then in many male-dominated jobs. During my training I tried to suppress any female inclinations (well, beyond the fact that I am attracted to men and always believed in Marriage!), to the degree possible. I had a "tough" veneer, worked hard to desensitize myself to things and suppress any natural emotional response to anything, thinking that to have empathy, to show emotions made me "girly" and would thus cause me to lose the respect of my male peers, maybe even my female peers.

Oh, sure, I painted my nails, wore makeup, and had long hair, but my attitudes revealed a very deep misunderstanding of what it meant to be a woman while I continued to give in to the culture surrounding me.

I will say no more of my history, other than to say that as I returned to my Faith, I have had to struggle a great deal with who I thought I was...and who God created me to be as His adopted daughter and potential Bride of Christ. I have to admit that this has been a big issue in my vocational discernment, and one that is ongoing as I try to resolve my crustiness against the need for holiness.

Contemporary Misunderstandings of Historical Realities

Because of the scourge of radical "feminism", the role of women in the Church is often misunderstood, even very intentionally so! To "misunderstand" is a way that we seek directly to justify ourselves in our unbelief or attitudes that are comfortable to us and our circle of friends. I do not point fingers at anyone in this, for it is human nature to do this with regard to any attitude or sin we hold dearly. It's an unfortunate part of our fallen nature, and something against which we need to remain on guard. Because of this, I cut radical feminists absolutely NO slack because I used to be one (or very close) too, and I remember the unspoken thought processes we shared, innately understanding, as well as the power of propaganda and rhetoric that we used to ignore rational discussions that sought to educate.

It was a lot easier to slam the Church or "misdirect" the discussion to something "peaceful" than to actually recognize the Church in her wisdom actually had something to offer...and that was salvation.

No one ever condemned me for my feminist attitudes. They didn't have to. The few people I met who didn't agree with my disordered ideology offered measured, truthful, and calm words, which were enough to lead me to condemn myself. Don't tell me, then, not to "judge", for I have been there; because of that, I actually have nothing but pity for those women who continue to engross themselves in their condemnations of the Church's constant pleas to recognize their (our!) true dignity as women created in the image and likeness of God!

People, both within the Church (sadly!) and without, have the impression that women are "excluded" in some way, or "oppressed" by an evil hierarchy. Those who stay in the Church actively work to disseminate their disobedience and misinformation "within" (which isn't actually possible, theologically) to try to destroy the hierarchy established by Christ and enforced by the Holy Spirit. Those from outside the Church work hard to crush this beautiful Bride made up of men and women both, this Bride born from the side of Christ, whom He loved so dearly He gave everything to save.

Instead of being open to the message of the love of Christ and beauty of woman, these people try to destroy beauty in order to spiritually photo shop their own disordered political and even sexual ideals.

The imagery and reality of true feminism reigns in both the Old and New Testaments; we see it in the images used in the prophets to explain the undying loyalty of a husband (God) to his wife (His people) in spite of her vile unfaithfulness. We see it in the stories of Hannah, Sarah, Rebekah, Judith, and Esther, (among others), all powerful and heroic women who stand as representatives of the Church, proleptic of the role of Mary.

The greatest of God's creation wasn't a Man (for Christ Himself is God so stands outside of this paradigm), but a Woman, that being she who bore Him. She stands above all men as an example to ALL.

I've also written previously on a few Biblical stories often misinterpreted to justify the false idea of "unjust patriarchal dominance" and that post can be found here, if you are so inclined. (That article is actually one of my most popular based on the number of clicks it receives in web searches.)

The Reality of Being a Catholic Woman

In honestly living my Catholic faith, I have to say that never before have I ever felt so respected as a human being.

I count among my closest friends and associates both clergy (priests) and laity (everyone else.) In our everyday contacts, in their friendship and even in randomly passing, they affirm my femininity and value in ways the secular culture tries so desperately to destroy. It is they who urge me on towards God, to bring my gifts (whether practical or spiritual) to enhance the Church, and if I do so, they reveal how it in turn enhances their own calling and also directs them also on to greater holiness.

I have to ask...what in these relationships is "oppressive"?

On the Role of Women

This discussion would be incomplete if I did not address this, the biggest cultural discussion on the topic of women and the Church.

I think that many outsiders and those who maybe have only seen the distorted side of Catholic teaching (sadly too often taught by Catholic laity in leadership positions) get the impression that the only reason the Church bans contraception is to keep women "barefoot and pregnant" and in the service of her husband.

It's true that the Church values family, and I know of many large Catholic families, counting many of them among my friends! It's also true that a parish community does tend to revolve around family life and activities that help to build the family, and in this, often seems to exclude, unintentionally, the large number of single men and women of all ages (for we are the product of our culture, the lost sheep.)

I used to have some bitterness about all this family-orientation, not feeling called to motherhood, and feeling that, if I wasn't, then I must be good for nothing at all. I didn't WANT to be a religious for in looking at religious life as it has been lived out for so long, I saw nothing but the road I had already been down (embrace of New Age spirituality, etc.) and I figured I could live a better life in finding employment as a Social Worker all on my own.

I felt like I was all alone as a woman in the Church, and that there wasn't really a place for me. I kept hearing about "roles" and in looking at the Church, wanted to figure out what "role" I was supposed to fill even as nothing seemed to fit.

It took several years, and when I finally fully returned to my faith, I met other young men and women who realized that "role" was the wrong question. The Church isn't about "roles". That is a secular term arising out of our utilitarian non-philosophical age, much to the detriment of all.

We were not created to become "roles". We were created out of love, by God, for God, for love. "Role" can't possibly come close to suggesting meaning especially in this supernatural institution of the Catholic Church.

"Role" is meaningless

My "role", then, as a woman in the Church doesn't involve family and children. It's not about my job (I am employed in a parish), or about any liturgical business I might serve in the future or have served in the past.

Trying to define "women's roles" is really the wrong question entirely, and in so doing, completely ignores the reality of what the Church is, WHO she Is, and what she has to say about Herself.

"Who are You? And what am I?"

The above quote, I believe, comes from St. Francis (please correct me if I'm wrong on this), and it's the question we all need to address deeply when we think we are lost and without purpose. It is only in relation to God that we can discover our true identity.

As women, our place, just as it is for men, is to become holy as our Father in Heaven is Holy. We are to conform ourselves to Christ, to love Him and prefer nothing to Him, no matter whether we are single, mothers, children, or religious. Our vocations differ, but our value is clear in God's eyes and in the Church.

We don't need our femininity affirmed through definitions of exterior things, but only through being who we are called to be by the God who brought us into being out of His own love.

I am no one special in the service of the Church, and I practice my faith quietly in my own parish, attending Mass, praying in the chapel, and getting involved in other ways as I am able. In my work in the parish I am known only by my employment there, and in the same way, live out my faith in exactly the same ways if in a position of leadership.

When I go to a Catholic Church, I find the respect towards me as a person that the rest of the world ignores. I am seen for who I am, not for what role some agenda wants me to fulfill. I am encouraged to be who GOD has called me to be, and live that out according to HIS call, not my own selfish desires.

When I walk into a Catholic Church, it is a sanctuary, a haven from the rest of the world, and more real than anything in the rest of my life. When I am in my pew, appearing to be alone at Mass, I am at that moment more fulfilled that I have ever been before, for it is there that I lose my individual identity to become joined with the Church, past, present, and future. It is there that in losing myself, I gain the world and am taught to become ever more who I am, to be authentically myself in this ongoing battle in the world that wants to put me in a box and define me according to its restrictive "feminist" definitions.

It doesn't matter what I have done in the past, for in being Catholic, all that we are, all that we have, all that we will ever be comes to fruition in the Kingdom of God. I am not a Saint. I am not an important personage. I am an average Catholic woman seeking holiness and mostly failing, but in that failure, I most learn who I really am and in that, I become more and more authentic, more and more human. It doesn't matter that I'm crusty and shy all at once, or that I'm snarking off one moment and weeping with contrition in the next. It doesn't matter that in some ways I'm strong while I give in to weakness in others, for, as a part of the Church, someone else makes up what I lack so that I can contribute where they cannot.

I am a woman of the Catholic Church. I am not oppressed, but free, and I am PROUD to be Catholic!

What else is there left to say?

*

Lacking Charity

Last evening at the end of religious ed. classes I was walking through the hallway, locking doors, making sure everything that needed to be put away was, in fact, put away. As I got to the end of the hallway, one catechist was just stepping out of her room. She had turned off the lights, had the door open, and, realizing I was there to lock it, said to herself, "Do I have everything?"

In a mock-threatening tone, I said to her, "If you leave anything, you won't get it back for two weeks and I WON'T let you in!" I immediately joked that I didn't think I could ever be that mean.

She laughed and said, walking away, "I don't think you have it in you to be that mean!"

This might sound strange to you, but I was touched by her comment. Because I know that it IS in me to be that mean...and meaner.

Shadows

I have referenced a period of time through which I passed some years ago; I was angry, I was bitter, and maybe not EVERYONE saw it...but those it affected the most certainly did. It started sometime in my adolescence when I lost respect for my Mom (due to her illness, I'm ashamed to say), and it continued into adulthood, made worse after my father's death.

In short...I was mean to a lot of people. I took my anger out on others, those who least deserved it. I was disrespectful, I had no idea what "charity" meant and didn't care, and showed my "good side" to those who would benefit me (i.e. my boss, some co-workers) and the rest experienced my wrath. I wasn't passive aggressive...I was outright rude. I was outright disdainful of any opinion that did not match my own.

For awhile, I was a political Democrat (not formal, just where I was voting), and got sick of the phone calls from the Republicans. I'd not done my research and had bought the partisan propaganda and berated an innocent campaign caller. Quite literally, I "went off" on the woman simply because someone from that candidate's campaign had called in the past looking to speak with "the man of the house" and in my irrational feminazism I was offended so took it out on the innocent.

To this day, I shudder both at what I said and in consideration of the person I said it TO! I bragged about it to my roommate, one of the most left-wing liberals one could meet...and she was shocked by my behavior. That might have been the first clue to me that I was out of control. It should have been, anyway. But no...I went on being bitter and angry.

There isn't anyone who knows me today who would recognize me as I was then.

Thank God!



Conversion and Virtues

Unfortunately "charity" was not something that characterized my life upon my conversion. Yes, there were elements, but there continued to be anger and bitterness. The miracle was that I reconized what I had done to other people. As time goes on, I recognize this more and more, and have to admit I have a hard time forgiving myself.

But it's given me understanding. I occasionally meet "mean" people, and while I sometimes fall back upon my self-righteous attitudes, it's now easier to correct my thinking and apply charity...even if I don't feel it. That's not to say that I succeed, just that now, when I get critical, I actually feel guilt pretty quickly.

A friend recently said something to me about a humorous exchange between she and another friend: "I'm a lot meaner than you and I will get you back!"

Now, this friend is not a mean person, and her threat isn't "real" in that regard. (I have no doubt she'll retaliate, but it won't be outside of humor!).

I know what true meanness is. When I was in Jr. High, I was the victim of a bully...and her followers. It was awful, and was happening around the time I nearly committed suicide.

The bully in question had been a marginal friend, one with a true "mean" streak. She was already bitter and prone to certain cruelties, and because of that, I never became close to her. She had a fraternal twin brother who was killed in an unfortunate accident (even more unfortunate as he was committing a petty crime of theft) during Jr. High, and her reaction was....anger. We'd never had problems, so all I can think is that I must have crossed her path at the wrong time...and became her convenient target. For more than a year, that girl and her followers tortured me in ways I'd prefer never to discuss. The school could do nothing (my Mom informed them, unfortunately, which did make it worse), and we ended up in a class together.

I don't think there's anyone in this world that can be "meaner" to me than this girl was during that year. In some ways, I just pitied her, no matter what she did...because she lost her twin brother. There was something about that death, that closeness, that stayed the hands of everyone. Unfortunately, it didn't help her, and didn't help those of us to come under her wrathful gaze.

I forgave her a long time ago, even as I flinch at certain memories and recognize the direction my own anger took when I was older. I think that, had I been dealing with the same things that she had been when she was just a teen...I might have reacted in the same way. In some ways, I think that's exactly what was going on; she focused her anger outward....at the time, I focused mine inward. (That was also when my dysfunctional family was imploding.)

She lived quite a destructive life for awhile, and then an unplanned pregnancy changed her. I heard from other friends how it had softened her, and at a church function, while she was 17 and pregnant, I saw her from afar, laughing and smiling. There was something about her that made me realize that she was different. Let's call it conversion...her unborn child changed her heart.

For me...it was different. I think I was angrier for longer. I was a bully for longer and without a cause. I just did it differently.

How amazing that I literally become that which I hated, and didn't even realize it.

So to anyone who thinks they are "meaner" than I, or that I don't have a "mean bone" in me...maybe so. But that wasn't aways true.

My own suffering at the hands of cruelty was true cruelty...and my own actions of cruelty make me realize how far we can ALL fall.

Conversion to Charity

I don't know when my heart changed. There is no set moment. But I do remember realizing that my own cruelty resulted not from a "low self-esteem" but rather, from a sense of entitlement. A sense of self-righteousness. A sense of "I deserve this", or of being "better" than others for whatever reason.

Popular ("pop") Psychology likes to suggest that bullies and "mean people" just suffer from a lack of "self-esteem".

To a certain degree, when I'd been younger, I'd had "low self-esteem". But as I grew up, that changed. And in fact, reversed. I didn't mean to feel entitled...but I did.

I'd grow up poor and on welfare, and was sick of receiving charity. So when I "grew up" and could take care of myself, when I got to the point where I realized I really did have a future, that's where my sense of entitlement entered. It was subtle, but built over time. And it made me mean. It made me impatient with others. Expecting others to cave in to whatever I wanted.

Some of this was learned from my bitter friends at the time...we encouraged each other in our bitterness and cruel attitudes. Judgment of others and gossip devoured our times together. We rejoiced in our enlightenment.

To this day, though...

...I know that it's in me to be that mean. I know that if I can conceive of a cruelty, I can committ it if the situation is "right". I know that the danger is there.

So it is that I work hard to be charitable. The first year of this blog evidences a lot of my anger and self-righteousness. I have lost a lot of readership since my focus changed...and as my ongoing conversion has drawn me to a different kind of writing. I'm not as angry as I once was. I'm not as demanding, realizing that it's not about me or what I think. Exposure to real people in real parishes has softened me. It has not compromised my beliefs, but has strengthened them; it has only changed my approach. And made me realize how many people don't understand how their own bitterness does not gain converts. It's so easy to make it all about "us" and what "we" think, and forget about the common good. It's so easy to remember devotions...and forget about the real people those devotions are supposed to benefit.

I wonder how many people I have chased away from the Church. I claimed to be Catholic even when I lived in every way, contrary to our Faith.

I wonder sometimes if I can take on their judgment...on my own I can't merit Heaven, and given what I've done to others....I can certainly claim souls for the other side. How can God show someone like me Mercy?

Joking about Meanness

Sometimes I joke with people in "mean" ways, which are really friendly barbs. We all do this to each other. But because of what I suffered, what I did to others, and with things I wonder might offend Charity, I often quickly repent of my own jests...and those of others.

I worry that I've offended my "target", or, even worse, God, through the jokes. What if I've gone too far?

Sometimes that does happen, and we've all been on the wrong side of it. But we let it go. How much is too much? How much "venting" about other people with friends crosses the line into gossip? How much does it take to offend Charity?

Sad to say....my catechist is wrong about me. I DO have it in me to be cruel, and fear I will do it again.

I fear that, for the rest of my life, I will continue to work on exercising charity, of taking a back seat where someone else is is forefront, even if what they are doing is offends others. And I will forever struggle with finding the balance between when it is right to speak up...and when it is right to remain silent.

For even Our Lord remained silent when He was questioned by Herod. We have to ask ourselves...of the two...which lacked charity?

It wasn' the One who was abused. It wasn't Christ.
*

There's No Crying in BASEBALL!

One of the Best. Lines. Ever.

From one of the BEST. MOVIES. EVER.

Hands down.

The first time I watched this movie, I was bored and just looking for something new, and had seen portions of it here and there on TV, which prompted me to finally pull it out of my roommate's DVD library and watch it.

I was enthralled. I love this movie. And for a long time I had cable so every so often I watched it, but for months now I've been deprived of cable services since I can't afford the fun stuff like TBS. So while I was at Amazon.com recently ordering my books for my upcoming semester, I also looked up DVD's and purchased "A League of Their Own" for the awesome price of $3.95. I'm not sure there will be anything left of this DVD when I'm done with it!

My Confession...

I've never really been a fan of baseball, and that's one of the reasons I delayed so long in watching this movie to begin with. When I was a kid I HATED softball with a passion, and every other sport. This was likely because I couldn't SEE..I had an astigmatysm and even in the classroom teachers couldn't understand why I wasn't grasping the material. I didn't realize that I couldn't see like the other kids could. I didn't realize that I sucked at sports because I literally couldn't see the ball coming at me and I couldn't observe the plays of any given sport, so when a ball or a puck came to me, I had no idea what to do. (Incidentally, for some really odd reason, I was REALLY GOOD at soccer and Field Hockey in spite of my vision problems...but never got the opportunity to play them when I got out of elementary school.)

But I digress...basically, the point is, I've never been a huge fan of Baseball. I've gone to games in person on occasion, and ALWAYS enjoyed the experience. I remember when the Minnesota Twins won the World Series in 1987; I was in Jr. High, and in the classes like Drafting, where we had "work time", the teachers let us watch the afternoon games as long as we also continued to work on our projects. It was then that I maybe had the first enthusiasm for Baseball. And let's face it; this is a uniquely American sport, with a unique place in American history. I still remember sitting with my Great Aunt Rose in her livingroom, watching the Twins Games on her little livingroom TV. She was a HUGE fan, and I'm guessing she'd remember the Women in Baseball portrayed in the movie I watched tonight and I only regret that I didn't even, at the time, know that women HAD a history in Baseball.

Themes
The themes woven throughout this movie make it a timeless classic. Themes of sisterhood, of family, of feminism (both the good and the bad) and chauvenism are woven masterfully and theatrically throughout the story, painting a very believable picture with a mixture of fact and fiction to keep us all hopping, inspiring us to learn more, and...might I say....to BE more?

The movie opens with the ongoing rivalry between the farm sisters, Dottie and Kit, both incredibly talented in Baseball, both responsible in their work on the farm. And even in their rivalry, the love and connection they have to each other is nearly palpable.

Then we see the theme of selfishness versus sacrifice, which switches throughout the movie to the people and the situations, revealing the depth of the characters as well as the human capacity to overcome their own personal failings. In the beginnig, Dotty refuses the offer to come to Chicago to try out, but at the ultimatum given to Kit, "If your sister comes, you can come too", along with Kit's desperation to finally come out from under her sister's shadow, Dotty realizes that her life, although already chosen, isn't hers alone, either. She sacrifices what she truly desires in order that her kid sister can reach her own potential.

That's love.

Yet when they witness injustice, a rejection of an incredible yet not-so-attractive woman, BOTH Kit and Dotty refuse to continue on the train towards their destiny. They both recognize talent and aren't willing to let the world's standards of "beauty" reject the calling of even a potential competitor. And so it was that Marla Hooch joined them. (And for the record...I NEVER thought she was ugly, and the way she was treated in the movie by "officials" really ticked me off! But wasn't she a beauty as an elderly woman?)

FEMINISM

This movie took place just past the peak of true Feminism. It seems to me, without researching the timeline and actual facts, that WWII marked a Golden Age of Feminsim, wherin the gifts of woman were recognized beyond the "barefoot and pregnant" category, where women literally stepped up to the plate and saved our economy, built our weapons, and even provided our timeless form of national entertainment in the form of women's sports. And un-heard-of event. Women literally saved America. U-RAH!

The event brought out the same weird extremes we see today; with the pre-programmed and prim prude who continues to suggest that women must remain in a niche that had oppressed them for so long, to the chauvenism that fought to "elevate" the women as sex objects, even using the idea of "charm school" to give the impression of "lady-ness" so as to better exploit their "wares" on the National, or even Intenational stage.

Even racism makes an appearance, and we are made to realize that women of color were not allowed into the League, to the very detriment of the Game. The dignity and proud humility (the only time those two words can EVER come together) of the black woman who pitches an out-of-bounds ball to Dottie says far more than any rhetoic can ever accomplish. I have to say that this, for me, was one of the most heartbreaking scenes.

The movie takes place in the time of War, when the men of America enlisted in DROVES to fight Hitler, which is what allowed this entire sports event to happen. Yet, in the Roadhouse scene, populated by the vixen-like girls of the Rockford Peaches, I, for one, have to ask...from whence did come all the smitten gentlemen that had aforeto encroached upon the locale of that venue?

They seemed mostly healthy and intelligent to me...what had kept these men home to woo the vixens, as opposed to going off to defend freedom for the world? Could they really be the cream of the crop?

But I digress. Hollywood always has a stash of their own "objects" to fit any movie scene. Poor things.

The war theme comes to bear, having been built up among the women of the Rockford Peaches, especially those who were married. When a telegram comes, the agony is nearly palpable, and in this day and age, I think we might feel it all the more. This scene NEVER fails to make me cry; it's too real. It's too direct.

It's too "now."

And yet, we still see the theme of selfishness, even with Dotty, our heroine. She was the great talent who had, throughout the movie, saved the day morally, personally, and through her coaching for the team when Jimmy Dugan was far too schnockered to be bothered to stop scratching himself *ahem* long enough to bother doing his job.

But then Dotty's husband arrives, wounded, and even though her team is heading to the World Series, her detachment is so great that she leaves the team. At their most dire hour, she walks away. It's understandable, given the situation (husband back from war), but there didn't even seem to be a struggle; she got what she wanted, and who cares about anyone else?

It brings us to consider, no matter what we want, even if life throws our desires our way, are we really free to forget that others need us, too?

But there is redemption; for Dotty, for the alcohol-soaked Dugan, for Kit, who steals the show.

And in the end, we are left with nostalgia, a sense of what has been, maybe what should still be, of friendships that never ended and lives that had come to a close. It is a bittersweet finale that reminds us that life is temporary, and even in the shining moments, they become only snapshots in black-and-white, sepia tones at best, and it is our memories that add the color.

Maybe this is for another post, but I can't help but observe that what original feminism intended has failed. This movie alludes to the new "liberality" of sexuality that carried on in their baby-boomer children that are still wreaking havoc in the Church and our society. And while all the worst has happened, the beauty of the Golden Age has not continued. We don't have Women's Professional Baseball, and if we did, no one would go. When I was in college, a Women's Hockey League started, but while I was in Mexico. If I could have afforded the equipment and if I'd been there at the time of formation, I would have been on the team. But there have been no opportunities since then, and Women's Hockey STILL isn't major league.

Women's Basketball might be the biggest thing, and even that doesn't have NEARLY the prestige of other of men's sports.

I would suggest that if Feminism were to get over their vagina-gazing (not-so-veiled reference to the gross Vagina Monologues), and over their obsession with the so-called "sexual revolution" that has done nothing more than cripple women and kill babies, well, maybe they could focus on the things that mattered to the women who started the Movement to begin with. The foundresses, the women are rolling in their graves at what has happened with the idea that they originally advanced; that women have dignity. That women are more than just cooks and housekeepers. That women have gifts and talents that can contribute to and even BUILD society.

Instead, we've gotten...a culture of death. A far cry from the freedom and dignity we see in the movie.

You see, I can do rhetoric, too.

But it's time to bring this long post to a close. And I'll do it in a fun way. For those who know this movie...do you find yourself categorizing your friends? Yourself?

I can tell you right now...I'm Kit. I've never had her moment of fame, but I'm her, in all her best and especially worst moments. I have her fiery temper, I've been overlooked for the shadow of another, and I've had her passion. I've even spent time blaming others for things that weren't their fault. And like Kit, as much anger as I've had towards the important people in my life, I've loved them even more and recognized their contributions to who and what I am. But I gotta say...I'm Kit.

Maybe one day I should write a version of this movie and cast my friends...

Authentic Femininity

Sarah (one of my dear Ohio friends who sends me hugs and baby drool in her emails) has linked to a post about modesty which is actually from another post and then another, so I'm just linking to Sarah. You can do your own legwork to read the rest!

But here's a snippet (from Sarah) that I'm plagiarizing in order to use it as a jumping-off point:

It all makes me reflect on the change of heart I've experienced in the last ten years. It especially makes me think about how FREE I felt after reading Theology of the Body (which is available online too) and I started understanding what authentic femininity really means. It doesn't mean being an object of men's desires. It doesn't mean putting up with sex. It doesn't mean ignoring anything distinctive about the double-X. Oh no, it is so much more than what gender equality (which often seems to translate into "gender sameness") would have us believe.

She's right, and there's a few points here to address.

The first is general modesty. I still occasionally come across photos from about 10 years ago in which I was posing in manners contrary to feminine dignity. I'm not talking "Girls Gone Wild", but just the same, I don't think there's any REAL difference...just a matter of degrees. So what if I didn't "bare all"? I certainly implied what I had, and I KNEW I was being ogled for my looks.

(As an aside...you'd never know it now. Youth IS wasted on the young! And I can't believe I just said that!)

Trashy Girl

I had my "party years" fresh out of college, I was healthy, I looked good, and as it was the culture, I flaunted it through short skirts, midriff-type shirts (on the "modest" end), and low-cut tops.

When I lived in Minneapolis with my left-winger best friend, she appraised me one evening as I headed for the door for a night of clubbing. I was clad in a short black mini, heels, and a tight long-sleeved black top.

"Do you want to know what you look like?" she queried sarcastically.

"NO!" I turned and stalked off, out of her sight. I couldn't stand her appraisal...I knew what she was going to say, I knew I looked like a hooker, and I didn't need her to say what I knew was true.

I looked like trash, and even now as I look back upon that night and those years, I feel like trash.

No, I was never into the "one night stands" like some of my friends (most, actually...), but I think it's only by God's grace such a thing was avoided. I've been in many bad situations, placed there by how I dressed and how I behaved, two elements that tend to go together.


On Androgyny

The legacy of radical feminism is an odd monster for it pits the beauty of humanity, trait against trait, warping what is supposed to be beautiful into something quite literally inhuman.

On one hand, while I would never describe myself as "beautiful", I wasn't hard on the eyes, and I knew that at times, I turned heads. And I was proud of that while it lasted. And as I said, I dressed the part, INVITING people to look at what I had, trying to put any discomfort behind me. I didn't want to feel discomfort...I only wanted to feel beautiful, to attract people to me by how I looked.

I was a late-bloomer...if you were to ask any of my high-school friends about me, they'd either say, "Who?" or "HER? Pretty? WHAT!?"

So when, in my young adult years, guys seemed attracted to me, well, I LOVED it!

But that's where the dichotomy of feminism gets its other half, ironically.

It was during this phase of my life that I applied for a Fire Dept., and was subsequently hired and put through training. I had a boyfriend at the time, also a firefighter for the same department, so I approached the Job for the Job...the guys were not interesting to me. And it's fair to say that for ALL of the women, guys were not on the radar screen.

I had come to this also with experience in Law Enforcement, and so the things I'm going to discuss encompass both that and the Fire Department as it relates to women.

To be clear, many women in those jobs remain very feminine in many ways, but ALL have a certain hard edge, which might even be natural either as part of their personality, or an adaptation to difficult circumstances...as you might find in a pioneer wife or daughter of the 1800's. Or the World War II era.

But there's more to it for most women; there is nothing official, but the very culture, both inside and outside of "the Job" encourages androgyny. Men are always men, and are expected to be men, especially in those roles. And women...are ALSO expected to be men...unless it's convenient to be women.

I lost a lot of femininity when I trained for those jobs. I lost a sense of who I was supposed to be, and in fact began to deny my normal female tendencies in order to be more like "one of the guys." My life became about being "one of the guys."

Most of my friends were guys, and really, I loved them and still do. But they got so used to me that they began to complain about women and the female traits they (WE!) have, such as decorating the new house with "girlie things."

What am I....roast duck?

Apparently.

Once I was on the Job, though, especially the Fire Dept., well, an extremely high percentage of women in that field are attracted to other women. I got along with everyone just fine, and I was a bit of a relativist also at that point. But I wasn't comfortable with what was going on...all the female
"love" triangles. (Of course, there were other "love" triangles as well.) It was rampant.

Look beautiful, have a great body...but make sure you act like a guy in all things but the bedroom. The message was clear, was never spoken, but was lived out every single day.

Even some of the women looked like men, making no effort to reveal their femininity in any way. It was as if they were ashamed to be a woman, like being a man is any better.

As my High School English teacher used to say about Freud's ideas about envy, "Who'd want one anyway?"

Exactly! I wished that some of these women had had my English teacher when they were in their formative years!

I think that even today I'm trying to get over the damage of those years. I've always had long hair, wore makeup, had long nails when I could, and when I dress up, I like "froofy-girly" skirts. But most days I'm "frump girl", favoring my old tomboy-type clothing, and that may never change.

Some days I look at other women, longing to be like them, longing to have never denied my femininity, wanting to be truly girly..but I fear it will never be so. But I'm grateful that I don't have to be a "guy" anymore. I can wear my heart on my sleeve, and even as I'm ashamed when my emotions get the best of me, I know that as a woman, it's part of who I am and reveals my humanity. Even as I cringe when I can't do the job of 5 men, I'm grateful when those 5 men step in to help and don't throw me a chainsaw, expecting me to wield it.

And when I walk through a doorway and a man opens the door for me, I'm thrilled to look directly at him, smile, and thank him for his courtesy. Because it's nice to be a woman and to be treated as such. It's freeing to know that I don't have to reveal myself (not that any of you would want me to!), and that the people I love don't return that love for my looks or any other ulterior motive. It's freeing to know that I don't have to be a guy and really, most of the guys I know don't want me to be one.

I love being a woman, and every day, I wake up and thank God for the wonderful gift and privilege of being a woman.

AMEN!

VOCATIONS

First of all, I'd like to dispel some myths.

There's not so much a crisis in Vocations as there is a crisis in Catechesis. Those are two very different things, and those realities are bourne out very practically. For example, it is those parishes that are all about "Social Justice" divorced from Morality, Tradition, and Obedience, that are crying out about this "crisis." They are crying because they can only see what is in their own backyard because they have shut out the light that is the Truth. Their "solution" is "married priests", "women priests" and varying innovative liturgies and "theologies" such as "eco-spirituality" and other nonsense.

Then there are those parishes that are Faithful, bother to teach the Faith LINKED to Morality, emphasize the Sacraments...and in those parishes, Vocations are RISING. It is reality. And the contrast leaves nothing to debate.

I began this blog while I was discerning a call to religious life. This call occurred first in Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, completely freaked me out, but made me take a very deep look at my faith, the reality of the Church, and my place within her. It was people I knew who came to me to reinforce this call and the need to discern, and I thank God for them.

But there is a problem, even in the faithful parishes.

We tend to ignore or minimize Vocations for women to the religious life.

I hear and read FAR more about dissident women seeking an ordination of power they will never have, than I do about women who are hearing the call to live as Spouses of Christ in faithful acceptance and obedience.

When I was discerning, while I recieved a great deal of support from the people in the Charismatic prayer group I was involved with at the time, (for the record, they would have put the quabash on any Community that was without a habit and that subscribed to anything other than faithful orthodoxy), and those priests I knew were also supportive...in prayer. What else could they do?

I was blessed with a Spiritual Director at the time, and I told him of my discernment over the phone...I think he was more surprised than anyone else. (You have NO IDEA what a mess I was...). We discussed it upon our next meeting. I'm certain he knew what the outcome would be (NOT CALLED), but he was gracious and knew I had to follow this path. He had been a Vocations Director in his home parish in India (is now a "Monsignor" and the Vicar General), and told me I had to go that route, and do what I was told.

So I called our Vocations Director, set up an appointment, and had a meeting with him on a very hot June day a couple years ago. Our meeting took place on the campus of the University of St. Thomas, and since he was late, by necessity and desire, I spent some time in the chapel where the Blessed Sacrament was reserved, and had one of the most powerful moments of my life, during which I realized that my very words had been spoken by so many others before me for centuries.

"Jesus, I offer you everything I am, everything I was, and everything I will ever be."

I don't know where the prayer came from, but there it was, and I offered it sincerely, realizing I was in the very chapel where the newest seminarian to the newly ordained priest may have spent his most profound moments of formation, where various women may have prayed the very same words, seeking to know God's will for them. And there I was...and I was nearly overwhelmed. It was only by God's grace that my composure was maintained because I was ready to throw myself at His feet. The very timeless of the Church was present there with Christ, and I will never be able to adequately describe the knowledge imparted to me in that moment.

My meeting with the Vocations Director went very well, he acknowledged my unwillingness to consider most of the local religious communities...for most of them are New Age, have embraced Social Justice divorced from true Human Dignity, have "kicked the habit", and really, have nothing to offer a revert who seeks to be faithful to the Church.

All he could do was ask a few questions, listen to my journey and responses to his questions, provide me with a booklet and some brochures...and wish me luck.

There isn't much in place for women, and I have met others who need more guidance as well and have the same complaint.

Our Vocations Director is simply not set up or equipped to handle women seeking Vocations to religious life. It's not his fault; he did the best he could with what he had, he offered his availablity and admitted his inability to guide effectively. I have nothing but respect for him.

So there is a breakdown in the system in our area. Maybe everywhere?

I find that there is a much stronger network in place for men who are discerning the priesthood, and indeed, I do place that at a higher degree of importance. However, in our times, we do need to have a better framework for support for women who want to respond to the Call.

We have the Serra Club in our area, my parish has a Vocations Committee, and there are other things, but it's not enough. Most of it is all about high school and college-age young adults. But what about those of us with a later call? Then what? Some people don't even know about Serra or other opportunities; they are adrift. I felt adrift, even though I knew of those groups.

A recent article came out stating the average age of newly-ordained priests is 35. What about newly professed Sisters and Nuns? There are many up and coming Communities, and I'm sure their median age is greater, too, but each publication claiming to be Catholic has different numbers. In my own observation, the old "Social Justice" orders are dying off with their embrace of goddess worship and New Age ideals, and orthodoxy is rising, but not a lot of reliable numbers are provided. From my own observation, again, it is the faithful Communities that are growing in leaps and bounds...and they would have even more if women had a better framework so as to approach them.

I do not think I am called to religious life, but my heart goes out to every woman who seeks this or seeks to respond...with very little guidance. Where is she to go? The Vocations Director in her Diocese will not know what to do with her, as much as he likely appreciates her response to God. The local religious Communities may not be fitting for her, thus she will need to do a great deal of reasearch all by herself to find out how to find out where she might have to go for answers to find out where she belongs.

That's an awful lot of "finding out" for anyone to endure. I'm quite certain that if it were so hard for seminarians, they'd be fewer and further between, and we'd have a true crisis on our hands, even in the most faithful of parishes.

It's an absolute miracle that any woman ever responds successfully to a call to religious life and manages to find the Community to which she is called, which is often far outside of her own hometown.

Yes, there is a crisis in Vocations, and part of it is within the system we have, as well-meaning as it is. Cannot something be done to better promote and assist WOMEN in their calls to religious life? Without the backbone of the Church, made up of women in prayer, we'd all be lost. Shouldn't we be doing something to relplenish their ranks?

Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi

I keep hearing about how men are fleeing the Church, how men are not involved in worship, how men of today find the Church to be too feminized.

I agree that it seems to be women who run almost everything, and historically it has been women who lead men into the faith. We seem to have that power, but is this a surprise? For wasn't it Eve who lead Adam, even though it was Adam who was created first?

This is part of the gift of femininity; we have an affinity for God, for contemplative communication, a need to be nurtured so that we, in turn, can be nurtured.

But somehow, this beautiful gift of God has become warped, and what we are seeing today has to do with the introduction of the demonic ideology of radical feminism.

The Church has become overly - feminized in a political manner, completely divorced from the true function of the Church and completely ruptured from the true meaning and representation of feminism. What we see today is a host of innovative liturgies, citing "Vatican II", which clearly speaks against innovation and, in fact, the document "Sacrosanctum Concilium" was written to reform the innovations that had appeared in what is now referred to as the Tridentine Mass.

This current dysfunction has everything to do with rejection of Tradtion, rejection of Truth, rejection of all that is Holy in favor of all that is "here now, gone tomorrow." It has been the radical feminists who have introduced New Age components into the churches and liturgies we now witness or experience. We hear references to "Gaia", God as a "she", and "homilies" by lay women crying out for female ordination, betraying the poor catechesis and lack of understanding of the solid theology of the Church. We see an outright rejection of the beauty of true human sexuality, resulting in a disordered objectification of immoral sexual union outside of the sacredness of marriage as a replacement for understanding of human dignity.

We see that the "feminization" of the Church is nothing but a twisted deception, for the Church, at her nature, has ALWAYS been feminine, for the soul of the Church is Marian. The soul of the Church projects us all as the Bride of Christ, of which Mystical Wedding was consummated upon the Cross. It is the place of the Church as a whole to be receptive to Christ, who gives everything for us, thus for we, His Bride, to give fully of ourselves.

Not so surprising, then to see in the actions of radical feminism so prolific today, the rejection of authority, of Christ, of God the Father, by those who also reject life through use of contraception, who advocate the slaughter of children in the womb. We see a complete rejection of all of the holiness of womanhood. We see a full rejection of all things feminine as women seek to make themselves "equal" to men, although their definition of "equality" is more synonymous with androgyny.

I've been hearing for most of my life about the "mysogynist" tendencies of the Church, about how "patriarchial and oppressive" the Church is, but over time, I have come to see how those very terms apply more to the resulting tyranny of women who have followed Eve and listened to the lie of the serpent, set to lead Adam into the sin that rejected us all from the Garden of Eden.

For you see, the Serpent went after Eve because he knew that if he had her, he had Adam. Eve actually resisted the serpent, seeing his lie, and responded with the truth...so he dug deeper and lead her into temptation and sin. If you read Genesis again, you'll see that Adam didn't even bat an eye. Rather, he simply accepted what he was given without question.

What a lesson. We see the gift of man and woman here; we see as we do even today how, although men have strength and leadership, it is the women who build them up and bring them down. Our roles are complimentary, and our powers cannot be abused, for when they are, we see the actual de-feminization of the Church proclaimed under the guise of "feminization".

The Church has always been feminine in nature; from the music, the trappings, the contemplation and mysticism, the beauty and serenity in architecture and in liturgical practice. Amazingly, men have also been drawn into this, as they cannot help but be drawn into the mantle of Our Lady who comforts them and gives them the strength they need to be true men after the example of Christ.

What we see today, however, are churches stripped of beauty, music divested of devotion and artistry, lyrics which sing to the people and not to the God we are there to worship. We see a complete de-personalization of Truth. We see bland, lackluster worship which cries out for innovation. We see masculinity in style rather than what is intended, that of the trappings of the Bride waiting to receive her Beloved.

Ironically, the radical feminists, under the guise of their ideology, have put our Mother Mary into the back seat, choosing to ignore her humble fiat in favor of seeking the secular understanding of power in the form of "ordination" and their misguided sense of "participation" stemming from their misreading and misinterpretation of Vatican II documents.

The Church has, as a result, actually been stripped of her feminine nature, which has resulted in the mass exodus of many worshippers, especially men. Men who are Marian remain and become involved as defenders of the feminine, which is what they are wired to be. But when the feminine mystery is stripped from the Church, what is left to defend? Where is the honor and the beauty? Where is the purity? Why should the men remain when there is nothing apparent to identify the Bride as what she is? Why defend an androgynous anomoly? From what?

These are strong words, but I state them as truth: Radical Feminism has penetrated and defiled the Church and has left her violated and bereft. Is there any surprise, then, that men are not engaging in worship? The very violence of the rape of the culture, the destruction of the feminine mystery, the propagation of death in secularity has invaded the Church and has violated us. Can we really be surprised that our Churches which have come to mimic secular "values" are no longer a haven to men or to women, but rather have become temples to the false idols of self-worship?

The Church has been violated to her very soul, and if we cannot keep the world out, how can we heal and become restored and remain the haven to which all can flee in order to be empowered to proclaim the love of Christ?

What is needed is a true renewal, a return to Truth, to Traditions, and to the embrace of our Mother. We need to reject the ideologies of the world which do not have our needs at heart, those ideologies which seek only to destroy life wherever it is found.

We need to truly re-feminize the Church, get rid of all the innovation and New-Ageyness that has permeated many liturgies and parishes, and bring back true liturgical music and Catholic prayers. We need to rebuild the Bride, recognize our roles in the Mystical Body, and seek once again the unsurpassable beauty which has been so abused and forgotten.

Then the men will embrace what it means to be men, what it means to defend the honor of the Church, what it means to stand up before the culture and proclaim the Kingdom of God.