feminine-genius

Prayers for women

The monthly prayer intentions of the Holy Father are a means by which all the faithful can join together to lift up particular needs in collegiate fashion. They are all-encompassing and remind us of the vast needs of the Mystical Body of Christ. The general intention for the month of April is as follows:

That the individual, social and political rights of women may be respected in every nation.

How very wonderful. We join whole-heartedly in this prayer for the universal needs of women and appreciate his brotherly affection and concern.

Given that his monthly missionary intention is specific enough to pray for the Church in China, we can see that he is pin-pointing particular challenges to the faithful that are not only contemporary but urgent. In this wise, it is entirely possible that his concern for women takes into account the particular difficulties that Islam proposes, given its restrictions on women in all the areas mentioned above. In fact we would name Islam as one of the two gravest threats to women's legitimate freedoms, along with the sexual utilitarian heresy which has gripped the West, reducing women to objects and inhibiting their ability to be appreciated as integral beings fundamentally equal to men.

Whatever his "intentions behind the intentions," we appreciate this month's focus and will pray sincerely for God's will to be manifest in the lives of all women.

Names in a patrilineal culture

James Akin has a nice explanation on why women take their husband's last name upon marriage and what was behind the push for women to keep their own names.

In patrilineal cultures when a marriage occurs the wife becomes part of her husband's family, and if you have family names in such a culture, it becomes natural for the wife to take her husband's family name.

There may be a sense in such cultures that both the husband and wife are really part of each other's families now, but since descent is reckoned by the male line, there is a greater sense that the wife is part of the husband's family rather than visa versa.

These are the reasons that the custom exists anthropologically, but the origins of the custom tended to be obscured in the minds of many.

When radical feminism came along, it wanted to radically tinker with the sexual status quo, to smash traditional gender roles, and even to call into question the institution of the nuclear family. (I'm talking about radical feminism, mind you, not moderate feminism that merely wanted better treatment for women.)

Doing away with the historical naming conventions would serve those goals (as well as making it harder to keep track of who is related to whom, thus undermining the family), and so not taking the husband's name became a symbol of defiance against traditional values.

He makes it clear that it's a question of culture rather than one of theology. Many cultures operate differently than the US, and he carefully suggests that motives for bucking the system will vary. The comments he's accrued on the subject are worth reading as well.

"Destruction of capital"

The Dutch Labour Party is upset with women who don't use their education in the workforce and want to penalise them, since the state helped to subsidised the cost of school.

MP Sharon Dijksma, deputy chairperson of the PvdA's parliamentary party, believes the punitive measure is needed to stimulate more women to join the workforce. She outlined her ideas in 'Forum', a magazine published by employers' group VNO-NCW.

"A highly-educated woman who chooses to stay at home and not to work - that is destruction of capital," Dijksma said. "If you receive the benefit of an expensive education at the cost of society, you should not be allowed to throw away that knowledge unpunished."

The MP said a fine for non-working mothers is a logical consequence of the PvdA's intention to introduce a 'feudal system', under which graduates repay money dependant on their earnings. "If someone chooses not to work, then a substantial repayment is in order," Dijksma said.

Totally logical for the materialists and wholly in keeping with those who subscribe to the dialectic view of history -- and yet the myopic aspect of this idea is only outflanked by its stupidity. Birthrates all over Europe are at crisis levels, since not enough children are being born to support the system and the aging population, so someone comes up with a solution which will undermine -- who? Those who choose to dedicate themselves to being mothers. Brilliant.

If these marxists would only go and live their toxic dream without dragging down civilisation with it, we'd be better off. Thankfully, the response to this proposal has been quite negative. Thus, it only exposes these folks for what they really are.

It also goes to show that "choice" for these people doesn't mean all choices. You have to choose what they want you to choose.

Dumpster diving vs the heavenly banquet

Christopher West makes a great analogy between authentic love as the heavenly banquet and lust as a dive into the nearest dumpster for something to eat. Commenting on Deus Caritas Est by Benedict XVI, he notes:

The Pope observes that Christianity is often criticized for being opposed to the body and sex. While he admits that such tendencies have always existed, Benedict insists that negativity toward the body and sex is, in all truth, foreign to authentic Christian belief and practice.

Christianity does not "blow the whistle" on erotic love. It seeks to rescue it from degradation, to "heal it and restore its true grandeur," says the German Pope.

In order to restore erotic love's true grandeur, he argues that we must experience the purification of eros (human, erotic love) by agape (divine, sacrificial love). As this happens, eros is able "to provide not just fleeting pleasure, but a certain foretaste of the pinnacle of our existence, of that beatitude for which our whole being yearns."

Modesty in women and purity in the way we love will provide the signposts that everyone around us needs to find heaven. Good essay.

Sheesh -- now you tell us

Oh, by the way, that contraceptive pill you've been taking is dangerous.

A contraceptive pill that could reduce rather than increase the risk of breast cancer should be available within five years, scientists have said.

Did you say that the one you've been touting for years increases the risk of breast cancer?? Where is that in the headlines and in the American Cancer Society's pamphlets on breast cancer? Where is that in the sex ed classes for young adolescents and in Planned Parenthood literature? Do you mean to say "Protect Yourself!" strategies aren't safe in the long run? Thanks for finally saying something.

But what have these kind scientists in mind to keep women sexually available and sterile?

It works by stopping periods altogether and would put an end to the symptoms of pre-menstrual tension. It could also reduce the chances of other problems such as endometriosis and cut the increased risk of heart disease in older women who are overweight or smoke and use oral contraception.

Several groups of scientists and pharmaceutical companies are carrying out research on the use, as contraceptives, of anti-progesterone compounds, also known as progesterone receptor modulators (PRMs).

Pumping women full of hormones to stop a normal process as fundamental as menstruating? Maybe the male scientists could pilot a program first that ends their need to urinate. That's irksome too and if they would first volunteer to try that, then they could encourage women to shut down one of their living systems.

One scientist had the cahunas to say the following:

Speaking at a briefing at the Science Media Centre in London to mark the 50th anniversary of the first clinical trials of the Pill, Prof [David] Baird said: "We are looking at an entirely new type of pill that abolishes periods. It will have enormous health benefits.

"Early trials have suggested there are few side effects. Long-term, rare side effects would become obvious only when they have been taken by enough people for a long time. So far they are safe."

So far they are safe. This man should be thrown into a cold, dark pit and left there. (Or we could simultanously try the urine-free trial on him.) The sad thing is that his inane comment will be accepted and this pill will be widely distributed. All bow to the mighty god of "free love."

The Marian precedes the Petrine

The Vatican Information Service relays the Pope's homily from Saturday, in which he distributed the rings to the new cardinals. This is essential information for all, but especially for women, who model their lives after the Bride:

After the Gospel reading, the Pope pronounced his homily which he began by recalling how the celebration coincided with the liturgical Solemnity of the Annunciation of the Lord, in which, he said, "we recognize the origins of the Church."

  "Everything began from there," he added. "Every historical achievement of the Church and every one of her institutions must be shaped by that primordial wellspring. They must be shaped by Christ, the incarnate Word of God."

  Later in his homily, the Holy Father dwelt on the word "beloved," with which the Archangel Gabriel addressed the Virgin Mary at the Annunciation. "Origen observes that no such title had ever been given to a human being, and that it is unparalleled in all of Sacred Scripture. It is a title expressed in passive form, but this 'passivity' of Mary ... implies her free consent. ... In being loved, Mary is fully active, because she accepts with personal generosity the wave of God's love poured out upon her."

  Referring then to the reading from the Letter to the Hebrews, which explained how Christ came into the world to fulfil the will of the Father, the Pope affirmed that the mystery of the double 'yes' to God from Christ and from the Virgin must illuminate the lives of the ministers of the Church, and support the cardinals in their mission as the "Senate of Peter's Successor."

  "Today's event," the Pope said, "emphasizes the Petrine principle of the Church, in the light of the other, Marian, principle which is even more fundamental. The importance of the Marian principle in the Church was particularly highlighted, after the Council, by my beloved predecessor Pope John Paul II, in keeping with his motto 'Totus tuus'."

  "Everything in the Church, every institution and ministry, including that of Peter and his successors, is 'included' under the Virgin's mantle, within the grace-filled horizon of her 'yes' to God's will. ... The theme of the relationship between the Petrine principle and the Marian principle is also to be found in the symbol of the ring which I am about to consign to you. The ring is always a nuptial sign. ... [It is] a reminder to you that first and foremost you are intimately united with Christ so as to accomplish your mission as bridegrooms of the Church, ... which you are called to serve with the love of a spouse. So the two dimensions of the Church, Marian and Petrine, come together in the supreme value of charity, which constitutes the fulfillment of each."

  "Everything in this world will pass away. In eternity only Love will remain," said Pope Benedict who went on to recall how the Virgin, after receiving the Angel's message, went to he cousin Elizabeth "'in order to be of service to her.' ... Those who love forget about themselves and place themselves at the service of their neighbor.

  "Here we have the image and model of the Church," the Holy Father concluded. "Every ecclesial community, like the Mother of Christ, is called to accept with total generosity the mystery of God Who comes to dwell within her and guides her steps in the ways of love. This is the path along which I chose to launch my pontificate, inviting everyone, with my first Encyclical, to build up the Church in charity as a 'community of love'."

This is our call, ladies. Our model, our paradigm, our essence. In this nuptial mystery in which we live, look to the Church for your inspiration, and Our Lady who was its first fruit and most perfect image.

The "financial abortion" option

Jeff Jacoby writes cogently about where the sexual revolution train is now, precisely at the station called, "Cads are True Heroes." Having marked the train's path from "Contraception," to "Abortion," to "Fatherless America," and now having taken a precarious swing near the town of "Men Support their Offspring," men are standing up for their freedom. Freedom from Responsibility.

This centers on a case concerning a man who engaged in intimate relations with a woman while making it clear he wanted no children.

A 25-year-old computer programmer in Michigan, Dubay wants to know why it is only women who have "reproductive rights." He is upset about having to pay child support for a baby he never wanted. Not only did his former girlfriend know he didn't want children, says Dubay, she had told him she was infertile. When she got pregnant nonetheless, he asked her to get an abortion or place the baby for adoption. She decided instead to keep her child and secured a court order requiring him to pay $500 a month in support.

Not fair, Dubay complains. His ex-girlfriend chose to become a mother. It was her choice not to have an abortion, her choice to carry the baby to term, her choice not to have the child adopted.

Rather than embracing the miracle, he screams foul and shakes the dust from his shoes.

Roe v. Wade gives her and all women the right - the constitutional right! - to avoid parenthood and its responsibilities. Dubay argues that he should have the same right, and has filed a federal lawsuit that his supporters are calling "Roe v. Wade for men." Drafted by the National Center for Men, it contends that as a matter of equal rights, men who don't want a child should be permitted, early in pregnancy, to get "a financial abortion" releasing them from any future responsibility to the baby.

Jacoby is righteously indignant at the state of affairs for women and children. I want to emphasise he should be disgusted, but Dubay is only thinking logically.

Does Dubay have a point? Of course. Contemporary American society does send very mixed messages about sex and the sexes. For women, the decision to have sex is the first of a series of choices, including the choice to abort a pregnancy - or, if she prefers, to give birth and collect child support from the father. For men, legal choices end with the decision to have sex. If conception takes place, he can be forced to accept the abortion of a baby he wants - or to spend at least the next 18 years turning over a chunk of his income to support a child he didn't want.

What this does is crystallises what women are playing with. They are the ones who historically are called to keep their heads, to put on the brakes, so to speak, when passion gets out of hand. They have had to deal with the long-term consequences of intimacy out of wedlock and are wired to deduce more clearly that sex goes hand-in-hand with commitment. This discussion should be a wake-up call, at least. God willing, it won't be adopted as policy anywhere, but just knowing that men could be this callous and selfish might tip off a woman that he isn't worth her time.

It is the logical extension of a "rights" based philosophy that has no room for responsibility. It may just get people thinking about the nature of sex and its "miraculous" relationship to ... progeny.

Shredding Holy Mother's treasures

European children are not only blindly wandering away from Holy Mother Church, they are taking the time to return long enough to insult and deface her, starting with her historical treasures.

While Europe turns Muslim the children of the West burn the evidence of its Christian past.

The French authorities fear that rioting students have destroyed unique manuscripts from the library of the Sorbonne University in Paris. According to today’s Catholic newspaper La Croix precious religious manuscript collections disappeared during the recent occupation of the Sorbonne. The books are mediaeval ecclesiastical chartularies: registers documenting property rights and temporary privileges pertaining to a church or monastery. The documents may have been burned on barricades which the students made near the Sorbonne chapel during the night of 10 March.

Women, as bearers of cultures and keepers of the flame, should rightly shudder at this. I compare it to thugs who insult your family, and then take the time to dig out and shred your photo albums and wedding pictures. Ultimately, there will come a time when we have to bear these memories in our hearts. Only our hearts.

While they cannot grasp who "mother" is, we must remember it all with love.