If anyone can find a way to make that title grammatically correct and casual at the same time, let me know. . .
1) A while back, Jen referred me to another blog post of hers in response to a comment I made on this post. On my most recent post, I seemed once again to be asking the same questions, so I decided to write a response to Jen. It went something like this:
One of the reasons that I object to those who advise married couples to re-prioritize with God's will in mind is that it implies a serious judgment on the couple--that by pursuing careers, they are not considering their vocation as a married couple and God's will for their family the way they should be, and that the couple needs to re-prioritize with these things in mind, making sacrifices, yada yada. But I think that even if the couple was not yet consciously considering God's will, they might have been acting in accord with it simply from having been directed that way. So the acknowledgment that the family is or should be guided by God does not necessarily mean that everything that has happened up to that point was fruitless or misdirected. I know that in my life and my marriage and my family, I have certainly seen what I now take to be evidence that we were heading in the right direction. In many ways, my conversion was a culmination of where God had been leading me through motherhood, marriage (in that order) and my pursuit of higher education. There are certainly some things that I should have done differently to be more perfectly in accord with God's plan for my life--like the marriage and motherhood being somewhat out-of-order--but as I read somewhere, on "The Anchoress" blog, I believe, the Holy Spirit works with such materials as he has, and I'm not sure God could have gotten through to me in any other way. Had I not become pregnant, my husband & I would have probably lived together without being married, and may have lost each other by doing so. So if you look back on your life and feel like you can see that yes, God has been leading you into certain choices simply by making the right options available at the right time, how can you possibly interpret that as a cause to re-evaluate? I know situations are different, and something like the materialism you describe may be a cause to reevaluate priorities, but that may involve a shift in thinking and not always an entire lifestyle change.
The other problem I have is that the implications are usually the most dire for women--especially ambitious women, who must give up everything that they have pursued to the point of marriage and/or motherhood. Had I believed this when I became pregnant with my son, I either would have been pushed toward abortion, or I would have left school before reaching my B.A., which would have had serious consequences for our financial well-being as a family as well as my ability to cope with the challenges of motherhood. But again, I don't think that commitment to a marriage necessarily involves the degree of self-sacrifice that is generally attributed to it. I do believe that it involves compromise, some self-sacrifice on the part of both spouses, devotion to the marriage, the spouse, and to family, but I'm not sure that it involves an abandonment of personal and professional goals outside of the house, especially if those goals were family-friendly or were made with the possibility of a family in mind. Now, if the plans were made with an overly idealistic view of how things would work with a family, that is something different, and reevaluation would certainly be in order. But these things tend to be discussed in such abstracts and absolutes that it is difficult to find oneself in what is being proposed.
2) Harry Potter. Before my mom left, we went to see Order of the Phoenix. It was compelling--more so than the other films, I thought. And it raised enough questions that I wanted to read the book. Now, I hadn't gotten past the first chapter of Azkaban previously. There were some things that really bugged me--and some that still do. One is the matter of internal consistency. But I have revisited Azkaban. They're great when you need an escape--and I do.
3) An article mentioned, I believe, by The Curt Jester, titled "The New Victorians." I do take issue with the title, but we won't go into the Victorian thing. The idea is that there is a movement among women to embrace traditional conceptions of family and reject the trappings of the Sexual Revolution, including scanty clothing and promiscuity.
4) An article mentioned last Friday in Jen's Friday Favorites about a professional couple who decided to keep a baby at a professionally inconvenient time, rather than abort the baby to allow them to continue with their plan to investigate restrictive abortion laws in Mexico. There's a lot that's troubling here, although the overall message that life can continue with a baby is one that I'd like to see promoted more often, as I've mentioned before. I'm frankly surprised that this appeared in the New York Times. It just doesn't seem like their kind of topic.
5) The Latin Mass. Specifically, what the recent Motu Proprio issues by Pope Benedict XVI really means, apart from the hype of those who want to say that it's a step backward, that the Latin Mass is anti-semitic, and all of the other charges that have been leveled in recent weeks. My question: Does this really affect most parishes in this country? Should we really expect to see Latin Masses popping up in our local parishes? Unfortunately, the answer is likely 'no'. It is great that in parishes where a lot of crotchety Catholics have been clamoring for a long time for the Mass in Latin, the priest no longer has to rely on the permission of the bishop (who, in a perfect world, would have seen the value of permitting the Latin Mass) to serve his parishoners' liturgical needs. And similarly a good thing that those who attend schismatic masses simply because they like the Latin can be reincorporated into the Body of Christ. But in places where there's not a huge agitation, just a handful who would really like to seethe Mass done in Latin on a regular basis (weekly or at least monthly), there is little real hope that the pastors will see the need to comply. Here is one post that suggests some of the obstacles--popular opinion being one, and one that attempts to explain the implications of the Motu Proprio. I've been told by a deacon friend that, while "the motu propio has made provisions for the faithful to initiate the request and a mechanism for bypassing balky priests
and bishops," several obstacles exist, including that "most American seminaries stopped teaching Latin in the 1970s or have greatly lowered the Latin that they teach their seminarians," resulting in a loss of comfort level with the Latin among priests. There also seems to be a scarcity of the 1962 Missal. I also wonder if the sheer hassle of trying to fit another Mass--in another language--in the weekend and determining who will officiate is part of the deterrent. Any way, I feel rather let down, like the Motu Proprio--so long anticipated--has been much ado about. . . you know.
6) A half-post started a while back, in response to a comment from Melanie B on this post. She links to an article by Christopher West, of Theology of the Body fame, whose work I have never before read, but who has some interesting things to say in this brief article about Catholic moms and breastfeeding. This comment came at an interesting time for me (although I read it a few days late), as my husband and I had just been talking about something related. I was remembering having read that the Catholic Church encourages mothers to breastfeed for nutritional/nurturing purposes--though I can't remember now where I read this. A quick Google search revealed that most of the mention of breastfeeding in a Catholic context has to do with NFP and Natural Child Spacing, with occasional references to John Paul II or a rather recent book called Breastfeeding and Catholic Motherhood that talks about breastfeeding in the context of the "vocation as a Catholic mother." None of these are quite what I had in mind. (I hate lost references!)
An aside: In the process of searching, I found a film review by the USCCB that listed potentially objectionable elements in a particular film as "Murder (not shown), several disturbing images of a female cadaver with upper nudity, realistic fistfight with blood, a dead pet, rough and crude language and profanity, sexual language and groping, breast-feeding, discussion of abortion, discreetly depicted urination, alcohol use and domestic discord." Hmph!! As far as I'm concerned, the term "breast-feeding" (however spelled) should never be included with the rest of that sentence! It should never even be considered potentially offensive. But the anti-breastfeeding bias exists, even in contexts where it should not. Well, at least we know that this doesn't represent the Church's official position on the subject!
Christopher West's article takes as its point of departure some of the recent controversies surrounding breastfeeding, particularly images of breastfeeding in popular culture (interestingly, I almost showed a breastfeeding picture from a magazine cover alongside a book cover for a book about implants in my class for visual rhetoric and had them analyze the implications of each, but that was the last slide and we ran out of time). He discusses some cultural differences in terms of how breastfeeding is regarded, and concludes more or less that it is our skewed (sinful) way of viewing things that results in breastfeeding being seen as somehow improper, inappropriate, scandalous.
Though taken out of context, I found this quote interesting:
John Paul II observed in his theology of the body that the “whole exterior constitution of woman’s body, its particular look [is] in strict union with motherhood.” Since the body reveals the person, John Paul believes that this speaks volumes, not only about feminine biology, but about the dignity and nature of woman as a person.
My initial reaction was to take exception to the first observation, that the “whole exterior constitution of woman’s body, its particular look [is] in strict union with motherhood.” That is, until I remembered seeing on several documentaries about sex the same assertions made from a scientific and evolutionary rather than theological perspective. The body, from an evolutionary perspective, is designed to facilitate procreation--that is, survival of the species--beginning with sexual attraction of the mate, which, evolutionary biologists maintain, has to do with the potential mate's suitability for mating and the production of healthy offspring. Anyway, the compatibility of these notions struck me as interesting. The second part of the passage above is a little more complex. I'm not sure what is meant by "the body reveals the person." Again, it is taken out of context, but I wonder how less desirable physical characteristics would be regarded according to this sentiment, or how cultural and racial differences might enter that discussion. . .
And well, that's all for now! (Okay, it was a cheap ploy to get 6 posts in at once!)
14 comments:
I've only just begun to read your blog--but already I'm wondering "Where does she find the energy to write her dissertation, take care of children, and still compose these sophisticated posts?" For me these days, thought hurts. Writing hurts more. Neglecting my blog is a form of pain-avoidance. :)
Now you see, the blog is easier for me than writing the dissertation because it's less formal & focused. The thinking & writing come naturally,and the blog provides a really nice outlet so that things just don't build up in my brain & overwhelm me! ;)
I had a teacher once (though now I can't remember who it was) who insisted that the prohibitions on splitting the infinitive and ending sentences with prepositions were the product of grammarians constructing artificial rules for English based on Latin grammar and that both constructions should be allowed in English. I've always considered that my "get out of jail free" card and have since broken both rules with abandon except when writing papers for classes. But then again I didn't really get punctuation until sometime after I graduated with my BA.
Anyway, this is a great post and I have so much to sat to it. You may regret shoving 6 posts into one.
1. A simple question: Does re-prioritizing necessarily mean changing one's priorities or does it mean revisiting your assumptions, taking stock, and seeing what needs to be changed?
Maybe the problem isn't with the advice to prayerfully revisit your priorities to ascertain that you are doing your best to live according to God's plan for your family; but with the implicit assumption that there is a one-size fits all solution for all families that will result from such consideration.
Although I do think that at least biologically speaking the woman is going to necessarily have to make more compromises than the man. I don't think that necessarily means she will have to completely give up everything she has pursued prior to marriage and children, but I do think that in many cases there will have to be compromises and she will probably have to make the larger sacrifices.
(I have more to say on this topic, but I'll stop here for now. I'm planning a blog post on this subject with a good quote from JPII.)
2. I'm eagerly awaiting my sister's copy of the final HP installment. Then I look forward to jumping into some good discussions on the series. Especially the internal inconsistencies.... though that may necessitate re-reading the entire series. Good thing I'm not too busy these days. :)
5. Motu Proprio. I take the long view. In the next few years will we see many changes at the parish level? Probably not. The Church doesn't, or at least shouldn't, move so fast. The desire for overnight change rather than organic development is what got us into the mess we are in in the first place. I think the MP is the first step in a much longer program of liturgical rehabilitation. So it's good to be excited; but only for the right reasons. If you expect immediate gratification, be prepared for disappointment.
As you say seminaries have de-emphasized Latin. However, I expect one of the first changes we'll see is that it will start to be re-emphasized. I think many younger men entering seminaries now are more open to learning Latin, more eager to embrace more traditional ways of doing things.
Things will change, though it will likely be a gradual change. And I think that's a good thing. Sudden change may sound appealing to those who are sick and tired of the status quo, but I don't think it would be a good thing. I think reform should be gradual and that it may take more than a decade before you can expect to notice a climate change in your average parish.
6. I hate it when that happens!
Someone gave me a copy of Breastfeeding and Catholic Motherhood and it has a chapter with an extensive collection of quotes.
I do remember seeing something about breastfeeding for nutritional/nurturing purposes. I'd suggest that those who emphasize NFP/child spacing have their own agendas and are thus pulling the quotes that best support their purposes; but the literature is actually more well-rounded than that.
Let me see if I can find something along the lines of what you are looking for if not the exact quote.
I'm with you. Blogging isn't effort. Not blogging is. I blog because to not write would be impossible.
When we find we have several post topics rattling in our heads, we save them as drafts. That way, we always have something to put up on the days when there is NO TIME to blog. :)
"I blog because to not write would be impossible."
I've heard the above, time and time again, from various people.... and have come to view it as just a tiny bit condescending, as if superior "writer" credentials were being asserted. :)
Now, I consider myself as much as a writer as anyone--indeed, a writer before anything else--yet the publicity of blogging activates all of those self-critical voices. Journaling is easy, because it's private; blogging is difficult, due to the self-exposure and consequent possibility of criticism.
Just to clarify: I don't intend any of the above in an unpleasant way. I'm sure that, for many people, words can be very free-flowing, regardless of audience. However, I constantly, compulsively edit--my chapters, my blog posts, and so forth... Luckily it's impossible to edit blog comments, or I would do this, too (hence this follow-up comment)! So I feel rather like the woman who works at being slim, and then hears someone else say " Oh, I could just eat anything and never gain an ounce!"
Do I envy your (everyone's) ease in writing? Yes, of course! And please, do take that as a compliment.
And yes, I'm insecure. I like to blame grad school. :)
Anyway, thank you to everyone for indulging my tangential outburst!
To say something on-topic:
"But again, I don't think that commitment to a marriage necessarily involves the degree of self-sacrifice that is generally attributed to it."
As one half of an academic couple, I agree with this statement. So far in our marriage, personal ambition and our relationship have flowed into one another--even re-inforced one another. However, we have had to play somewhat fast and loose with the gender roles that many of life's gatekeepers--my adviser, for instance--seem to take for granted.
Complicating the matter is the fact that my husband and I *do* believe in traditional morality, in being present as parents (to hypothetical children), in being open to conception, and so forth. We hold these values in common with other members of our Latin-Mass parish. However, in spite of our self-described "traditionalism," we don't look and act like many others at our parish.... But nor do we look and act like many other academic couples, who are willing to put off parenthood--and even to live on opposite coasts from one another, which always amazes me!
Like you, I don't necessarily think that God's will for women has to involve a complete sacrifice of research and writing (though I agree that biological factors probably will demand that her sacrifices be greater than her husband's). If God has given us genuinely helpful husbands who relate to our work and (in the case of academic couples) view us as colleagues, then our studies potentially could give to our marriages as much, or more, than they take from it.
Again, to bring up homeschooling: moms who do this have to educate themselves (and my mind turns toward the "Republican Motherhood" concept). So--as I see it--at some point I think that traditional Catholicism (at least) will have to come to terms with academic moms. When non-academic mothers read Shakespeare and Plato alongside their children--for the sake of their children!--it will become increasingly tough to tell them that professional study and teaching are incompatible with family life. Indeed, I think that it will begin to seem complimentary!
Again, thanks for indulging me...! I know that I've said nothing new.
When I save them as drafts, I lose interest and they never see the light of day!! But this way, I feel O.K. about not posting for a while. I've got a dissertation nipping at my heels!
As someone who teaches writing, I have come to appreciate writing processes as never before. Drafts are kind of a learned thing for me, and I still don't really make much use of them. The drafting for me doesn't happen on paper--it happens in my head, over either shorter or longer periods of time. Which is why I have problems with my adviser, who doesn't quite understand that when I'm "not doing anything"--nothing that I can trot out to show him, that is--I am generally working things out in my head in order to produce those pretty-good first drafts. I do edit my posts rather compulsively, but generally after I click "post." Then I edit it 10 times, every time I notice a split infinitive or whatever. It's an illness. I never could journal. It felt phony for me to be writing to no one in particular, or myself. I need to have some audience in the back of my head. Except for poetry, for some reason. The trick with blogging is that you only get a lot of criticism when you get a lot of readers! ;) I know to expect criticism when I say certain things about certain topics, but we're a pretty rational crowd around here! ;) As for it being impossible not to write, I had to think about that. It is more or less true for me, though the writing varies in subject, formality, scope, venue. When I don't blog, my friends get reams and reams of email. This way, I spread out the reams across more friends, and no one has the ultimate burden of keeping up with everything I say. Except my husband. Interesting that this should have taken the "writing about writing" turn. It's a favorite subject of mine. It goes along with the writing about reading and reading about reading--that whole literacy thing. I am a firm believer in writing to think, too, which is another reason the blog is good--it's what I hinted at earlier. The ideas form themselves up in my head, but I don't necessarily have evidence that they're doing so until they're written.
I do the same thing when I save them as drafts--lost interest or forget where I was going with it!
I read the "New Victorian" article and I agree that the pendulum swings back and forth with each generation rejecting the former's values. I guess it won't ever stop but I hope that for my kids they'll still think it's cool to be good and be a mom. Not some free-lovin' hippy kids.
That's not to say that upbringing has nothing to do with it, it does. But the attitude and culture you grow up in does as well. Hopefully we can keep trotting out these "I wish I had never..." stories and they can see how much I love being their mother and raising and schooling them and want that for their kids too.
Entropy,
I agree that upbringing definitely gives us the confidence we need to resist the trends, I think. Or the sheer obstinate will not to be drawn in. That was me. ;P
Rae,
So far in our marriage, personal ambition and our relationship have flowed into one another--even re-inforced one another. However, we have had to play somewhat fast and loose with the gender roles that many of life's gatekeepers--my adviser, for instance--seem to take for granted.
This is interesting to me. I completely agree with the first half, except that we had some unexpected twists & turns along the way that led to my husband's academic ambitions shifting and then being put on hold somewhat.
I would like to hear more about what you mean by "playing somewhat fast and loose with the gender roles" and especially the adviser taking certain things for granted. How do you mean? That s/he expects you to be more or less of the traditional "wife/mother"?
We also believe in being there for our children. We're working on the being ope to conception, though you wouldn't necessarily know that that's been a struggle to look at us these days! ;) And I know what you mean about not looking either like other academic couples or other couples in your parish--I did once attend a Tridentine Mass on a visit back to New Orleans, and we didn't look like that congregation!! But in my department, grad students with children are kind of taking over these days. I'm still a minority with 3...
This is a nice point, too:
When non-academic mothers read Shakespeare and Plato alongside their children--for the sake of their children!--it will become increasingly tough to tell them that professional study and teaching are incompatible with family life.
Melanie,
I wanted to respond to your point about the Motu Proprio. I guess I hadn't necessarily thought about it being a matter of evolution--or deevolution--or reevolution--anyway, of moving slowly! ;) I wanted someone locally to say, "Great, we can do one in Latin once a month!" so I could go. :( But I do wonder what message it will be sending if the parishes drag their feet or seem unwilling to do so. After all, they don't hesitate to implement "youth masses" with Protestant pop, but I guess they've been building up to that for decades now. I wonder if we'll at least see more Latin incorporated in vernacular masses? I'd just kill for some incense at the appropriate times. They've lost all the liturgical "trappings" that really raise the Mass to something that takes us out of ourselves. At least, that's how I feel. Sure, Mass is always sacred, but it's a lot easier to stay focused on that when the atmosphere being promoted is a sacred one.
Wow! A megapost!
Lots of good stuff here. Let's see if the house will stay quiet long enough for me to get through it all...
Now, I consider myself as much as a writer as anyone--indeed, a writer before anything else--yet the publicity of blogging activates all of those self-critical voices. Journaling is easy, because it's private; blogging is difficult, due to the self-exposure and consequent possibility of criticism.
Rae, you're my writing soul sister. :)
I'm not going to say that I consider myself a writer before all else, because I don't, but you've described my writing process precisely. It takes me so much time to write even a toss-off post that blogging has become more of a chore than a pleasure.
Hey! You've got an award waiting for you over on my blog ;)
Post a Comment