I've tentatively signed up for Familia in the fall. For those not familiar with it, Familia is a Catholic lay apostolate focused on the family. That doesn't help? No, I didn't think so. It's a program that invites women and men to get together in groups by gender and discuss topics based in encyclicals that relate specifically to the family. Given that the groups are gender-based, you might assume that the topics are predetermined based on gender. You would be right. And therein lies much of my hesitation. Part of the description from the Familia web site reads, "The unique and complementary roles of a husband and wife can be the source of joy or confusion as the two individuals work together to become one." What worries me about this is that "the unique and complementary roles of a husband and wife" could be read either broadly or narrowly, and I fear a narrow interpretation. Though they claim to want to "support every aspect of each person's vocation," I fear that what "every aspect of each person's vocation" entails will be narrowly defined. Case in point: when I looked at the materials on the web site, the men's program begins with a discussion of the dignity of work. The women's program is about femininity--and they use the rather reprehensible term, "authentic feminism." I object to the term for several reasons, but let's just start by saying that this is a rhetorical move that is designed to contradict feminism by re-appropriating the use of the term and turning it to Catholic-based purposes. So really, it muddles things by suggesting that the two things--feminism and Catholic conceptions of femininity--are equivalent, or at least complimentary, which they aren't. And it is intended to appeal to women who wish to see themselves as feminist, as a kind of "lure" into the Catholic conception of femininity. I should say "a" Catholic conception of femininity, because there is not a unified Catholic conception of femininity--there is no "official" description of Catholic gender, even within marriage. Equally disturbing to me is this: the men's program talks about what men do; the women's program talks about what women are.
I fear that this program, if not specifically designed for women who do not work, is at least designed for women whose jobs are secondary--to family life, or more specifically, to their husbands' jobs. I think of it in terms of primary and secondary careers. While a couple of the women at the informational meeting who had been participating in Familia for a while had jobs, the implication was that the balance between work and home had needed adjustment, and this program pointed that out. My family is of the utmost importance to me, but I also have, for better or worse, whether I like it or not (and depending on my mood it can go either way), the primary career right now. Or I will when I get a permanent position, so right now I have the task of diligently preparing to have the primary career. This is not to say that I devalue my husband's work, but right now, his position--while enjoyable to him at times, on a level--is not what he wants to be doing long-term. I hope that when I do find a position, he finds a position that is equally agreeable to him. That is the ideal goal. So I seek a balance, and I do not particularly want to be sent messages through the materials and discussions that suggest that I am not doing right by my family by devoting effort to work. It is a delicate balance, and I don't always manage it well, but will hearing about the "true nature" of woman help? Not sure. And it the program frustrates me so that I am thinking and pondering and arguing about it for hours afterward, that surely won't lend itself to professional productivity or domestic tranquility.
Clarification: I've been thinking about the terms "primary" and "secondary" career, and they don't set well with me. I might prefer the term"supporting career" to denote the career that might--if necessary--be abandoned or changed for one reason or another, or by choice of the person who holds that particular job. Right now, as I indicated (but not strongly enough) I don't have a career, I have a potential career. My husband's current career path, which it might be if he wanted to stay in this position or if we weren't planning to move on from here, is "supporting" only in the sense that it allows my potential career path to exist. It has facilitated the completion of my degree and is the steadier of our two sources of income--a real, full-time job, not dependent on the budget cycle or departmental funding from one academic year to the next. But it is also not the career goal we have both been working toward--the one that will carry us into a (hopefully) more permanent location, with greater earning power for the two of us combined and the family overall. Come to think of it, I'm not crazy about the term "career," as it implies living to work rather than working to live, but that's a different topic. . .
2 comments:
Interesting questions all. I suspect how you like the program is going to be very much dependent on the mix of individuals in the group, especially the approach of the leaders.
I began to go to a women's Bible study at our parish and got frustrated at the second meeting because the leader just abdicated her responsibility to keep the group on task and instead opted to begin an open discussion about the Church's teachings on hard issues: contraception, homosexuality, women priests, etc, etc, etc. I really just wanted to read the Bible and talk about kids and family life and my faith struggles with other women, I didn't want to seize control of leading the group or to have to do apologetics, explaining the Church's teaching. I didn't sign up for that. So I found excuses not to go to the second and third meeting (two small girls and the final weeks of pregnancy didn't make that hard to do.) I'm still fuming though because it is so hard to meet people at our parish and it seems every attempt has been stymied. For example, the Parish picnic conflicted with my niece's graduation party.
Anyway, despite all that, I think you should at least go and give the program a chance. You can always decide after hearing their tack that it's not for you; but it may surprise you and be exactly what you need. Or maybe it will turn out that you are what they need and that your point of view will be helpful to someone else who is in a situation like yours?
By the way I think it's an interesting question about whether it is at all possible or desirable to appropriate the term feminism. The pragmatist in me sometimes thinks that perhaps the lure is necessary. Certainly I think that going the other route and bashing feminism wholesale only alienates women who might otherwise find much of the Church's authentic teaching persuasive. I just read an essay about women and the priesthood by Alice van Hildebrant that I found really offputting precisely because she is so on the attack, I kept wondering who she thought her audience was if not women who consider themselves feminists or at least who find feminism attractive. Either you're preaching to the choir or you need to find a way to reach wary people where they are without alienating them further and driving them away completely.
"the men's program talks about what men do; the women's program talks about what women are."
On one hand that makes sense to me in that I think that reflects how men and women see themselves. Men most often self-identify primarily with what they do while women self-identify more often in terms of relationships and a sense of who they are in themselves. But yes I would hope that each program strove to balance those tendencies, that a men's program especially would move beyond that what you do to include delving deeper into masculinity and relationships and who a man is outside of the work he does. Likewise I think leaving out women's work and the ways it forms our identities is short-sighted at the very least.
Not I'm starting to be curious to hear about how the actual presentations follow through on these ideas.
I have never been to Familia, but I think you're both right and wrong about it, from my observations of a very good friend and what she shared.
I think it's a very intellectual thing (reading encyclicals) and beneficial. However, I think a lot of the "how it goes" depends on the dynamics of the actual group.
My advice (which you didn't exactly ask for, I know) would be to give it a try (which presumably you're already doing since you're signed up). I once attended MOMS with less-than-favorable outcomes, at least so I thought. But then, in a moment of grace, I realized something enormous about my participation: It's not always about me. Sometimes, my participation in these sorts of miserable group activities (and I was pretty miserable in the MOMS format, with my specific group) isn't for MY benefit.
Maybe I helped someone. Maybe I cooperated with God's grace, in some little way. Maybe I needed to obey God's little nudge (or, in my case, big 2x4) to participate, though I wouldn't necessarily feel all great about it at the end. Someone told me afterward that I had helped them. It wasn't as enlightening as I would have thought, but it does lead me back to that prayer, "Lord make me an instrument..."
Good luck with Familia. I'll be interested in your experience...it's nothing if not intense as a commitment!
Post a Comment