"[A] clear gap -- of class, income and education -- exists between those who work in this increasingly professionalized reproductive justice movement and those women who now form the majority of abortion patients," Joffe and Cosby write. "... The women we encountered in the waiting rooms of three abortion clinics, located in the South and Midwest, have little experience with the contemporary reproductive justice movement, or indeed of politics in general. But they are highly aware of the shame and stigma surrounding abortion."
It is because of this shame, the writers state elsewhere in the article, "[r]ather than expressing solidarity with others experiencing unwanted pregnancies, nearly all our respondents took pains to distinguish themselves as different from other women getting abortions."
In effect, the writers conclude that shame, as well as children, should be aborted. Throw out the dirty bathwater with the baby,
It seems to me that abortion advocates love the higher moral standards of the poor when they advocate social-welfare programs, or when they oppose military intervention. Witness Sen. Hillary Clinton's vocal gymnastics when speaking in a black church:
It's only when those same poor folks uphold the dignity of human life that they become thick and misinformed, requiring re-education by their more privileged, better-educated and (often) lighter-skinned sisters in the movement.
A religious organization's pro-abstinence Web site tells teens and young adults that "condoms are not the answer" and neither is the contraceptive pill or the patch. In addition to pointing out failure rates of the contraceptives, it notes that " no form of birth control protects against the non-physical effects of sexual activity. Guilt, worry, regret, shame, depression and other emotional consequences remain the same, regardless of any contraceptives that may be used."
The site also warns of spiritual consequences to nonmarital sex &8212; that such activity cuts off one's soul. Sex outside of marriage is a "relationship killer," it warns, adding that there is "no condom for the heart or for the mind." The site's language is often preachy and sometimes oversimplified, but its message hits hard and makes no apologies for its orthodoxy.
Kudos — or, rather, mazel tov, then — to the Orthodox (Jewish) Union for having the chutzpah to take a public stand for chastity.
Athos of Three Massketeers is camera-shy, but he's posted the Eden half of his shot of me at Tuesday's Dawn Patrol blog-reader bash at a Washington, D.C., Cosi eatery, along with a lovely writeup of the event. "Framermike" has an account of the evening as well. I had a beautiful time myself and hope we can all do it again soon — many thanks to everyone who came.
So, yesterday afternoon I was enjoying a happy moment in chastity-author mode — in a shop in Washington, D.C., on a gorgeous spring day, speaking on my cell phone with a Catholic priest while on my way to meet someone from a nonprofit organization that promotes family values.
The only part of the picture that didn't quite mesh was that the shop was Victoria's Secret.
I had boycotted Victoria's Secret for the past five years, out of disgust with their Frederick's of Hollywood-style window displays and their use of "angels" in their advertising. (That didn't stop me from writing a headline in the New York Post back when Bob Dylan sang in one of their TV commercials: "Dylan sells out for a thong.")
Unfortunately, I had packed quickly for my D.C. trip and had, um, forgotten something, and I didn't have much time to find another shop that sold what I needed.
The aforementioned priest phoned right when I was at the checkout, so I was distracted as the cashier rang up my purchase. It was only as I was headed towards the front door that I realized I was carrying a big, pink laminated shopping bag emblazoned with the store's name.
A vision suddenly came to me of my walking into the offices of the family-values organization, where I was going as author of The Thrill of the Chaste, trying to look all modest and wholesome while toting this ridiculous candy-colored bag like a neon sign from a place that sells Angels Hydraulic Ultra-Padded Dream Lace Push-Up whathaveyous.
I asked the priest to hold on and dashed back to the cashier. "Do you have a brown bag I could use?"
The answer was no.
"I don't want anyone to know I shopped here," I exclaimed. "Do you have a plastic bag you could turn inside out?"
The cashier looked at me like I was insane. I probably did seem odd, if not downright rude, as I summarily yanked my magenta-tissue-wrapped purchase out of the shopping bag, dumped the bag back at the cash register, and stuffed the purchase into my attaché.
"Sorry, Father," I said into my cell phone as I stepped back out into the bright sunlight of Connecticut Avenue, even though I should have been apologizing to the cashier. "I, uh ... I didn't want anyone to know I had been shopping at Victoria's Secret."
He laughed heartily. "When I heard you say that to the cashier," he said, "I knew that's where you were."
To mainstream media outlets covering the surge in certain orders' vocations, the youthful Sisters of Life have become the rock stars of the religious world. The prevailing angle is that they are Just Like You and Me except that they're nuns.
There's this cool clip on YouTube from a documentary:
Both of these clips somehow omit manage to omit entirely the fact that the sisters do more than pray and study the Bible.
The Sisters of Life do what no government agency does, and what very few even in the pro-life movement accomplish: giving a full range of practical as well as emotional support to pregnant women who want to choose life but face obstacles such as poverty, abusive boyfriends or family members, or joblessness. These nuns double as social workers, providing shelter when necessary and helping the women they serve to get their lives together so that they can be fully prepared to mother their children. More than that, the sisters train volunteers who in turn open their hearts and sometimes homes to pregnant women in need of respite, who often have few friends or family who support their choosing life. And that's just some of their work; they also do much more. While others talk about building a culture of life, the Sisters of Life are quietly, humbly, doing it.
I'm sorry to say that there is precious little on the Web that captures the breadth of the sisters' apostolate, though their home page gives an overview. The best encapsulation I can find is a couple of pages from their newsletter. Read the stories about Susan, who went through their Entering Canaan program for post-abortive women, and Josenia, a pregnant young woman they helped, who I met at the sisters' Sacred Heart convent.
For the sake of the Sisters of Life and those whom they help, I'm very happy if all the attention they receive draws women to enter the order. At the same time, I hope that one of the camera crews beating down their door can stop videotaping their roller-hockey games long enough to show the truly remarkable work they do for the women and families they serve.
Here are the latest dates for the Thrill of the Chaste tour. I am so excited about each of these — most of all, the Dublin date, as I've never been to Ireland. (In particular, I'm eager to see Glendalough.)
Speak at "God Is Love," the annual Catholic Youth Conference for ages 18-40, sponsored by the Legion of Mary, All Hallows College, Dublin, Ireland.
June 15
Speak at 26th annual G.K. Chesterton Conference, University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minn., 7 p.m. (just before Joseph Pearce's talk). Topic: "“The Girl Who Was Thirsty: How G. K. Chesterton Opened the Door to My Conversion."
"There are four great lamps of thanksgiving burning before me.
"The first: that I was born out of the same earth as you.
"Two, I have tried to love everything in the universe as a remote preparation for loving you.
"Three, I have never run after strange women. You cannot understand how much this prepares a man for true love.
"Four, my life ends here. It has led me to you."
— G.K. Chesterton writing to his future wife, Frances Blogg, according to Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. The archbishop quoted the above lines in "Three Kinds of Love," one of the talks on his "Family Retreat" DVD.
As I mentioned earlier, there will be a Dawn Patrol blog-reader kaffeeklatsch in Washington, D.C., this Tuesday evening. So far, I've invited everyone who expressed their desire to attend. If you'd like to be there, please leave a comment below, including your e-mail address, or write me ASAP. If we're not already acquainted or you've never commented before, please tell me a little about yourself. It's a small gathering and I'd like to be at least a little familiar with the attendees, since my own life is pretty much an open book.
Pro-choicers bid to eradicate guilt, babies, and poverty — in that order
Alternet writers Carole Joffe, a UC Davis professor, and Kate Cosby take on "The Loneliness and Shame of the Abortion Patient" and conclude that the main problem facing women who seek abortion is shame. Not shame at the thought of bringing forth a child, mind you, but shame over their abortion:
The situation we describe is very different from the one that existed in the United States in the 1970s, around the time of legalization of abortion. Then, many women seeking abortions felt part of a larger movement. "Second wave" feminism was flourishing and women's health issues were a central focus of the movement. People still had fresh memories of when abortion was illegal, and thousands of women died and many more were injured from unsafe abortions. Rather than being ashamed, many abortion patients of the pre-Roe v. Wade era recall feeling entitled to having this once dangerous procedure done in a professional and women-centered setting.
Ah, for the days when a baby wasn't a baby, but an opportunity to make a political statement! Snuff out that "blob of tissue" and stick it to The Man! You're not merely a woman with a unique, irreplaceable life growing inside you — you're "part of a movement"! Rejoice and be glad!
The authors go on:
The new occupation of "abortion counselor" was established in this period -- someone who explained the procedure to the patient and accompanied her throughout her stay at the clinic. Feminist health activists pressured the newly established clinics to keep prices low and to make sure doctors were sufficiently respectful to their patients. In short, for many patients in the early years of legal abortion, the experience was both "personal and political," in that there were constant reminders that this medical procedure was tied to a larger movement. In contrast, in many of today's clinics, the staff is so busy complying with state-imposed "informed consent" requirements, which often involve telling patients downright lies -- for example, the supposed link between abortion and breast cancer and other distortions of risks of the procedure -- that there is rarely the opportunity to impart a positive political message about reproductive justice.
Again with the "larger movement," enabling the woman to make a decision that is "personal and political." But hey, there were a lot of larger movements killing people for personal and political reasons back in the early Seventies: the Black Panthers, the Symbionese Liberation Army, the Weather Underground; it was the thing to do. Why just go to the doctor for a prenatal exam when you can instead kill your child and "impart a positive political message about reproductive justice"?
Ah, but times have changed, and contemporary abortion patients no longer understand that they can effect positive social change merely by having their preborn child destroyed. "[A] clear gap -- of class, income and education -- exists between those who work in this increasingly professionalized reproductive justice movement and those women who now form the majority of abortion patients," Jacobs and Cosby note sadly. They go on:
The women we encountered in the waiting rooms of three abortion clinics, located in the South and Midwest, have little experience with the contemporary reproductive justice movement, or indeed of politics in general. But they are highly aware of the shame and stigma surrounding abortion. Some spoke of their fears of being recognized in the waiting room by acquaintances. Others, when asked if they would have preferred to have their abortions performed by their own doctors, in their home towns, rather than undertaking a drive of several hours to a clinic, recoiled at the thought. "I don't think that I would be comfortable going to my ob-gyn for an abortion, knowing that's the same man that delivered my children. ... I would think he would think of me differently. ... I mean, he sees me in one light, and that's the way I want him to see me."
None of the women interviewed said they thought abortion should be illegal. But many expressed ambivalence about their decision to have one. An unmistakable sense of sadness hovered around our conversations. Ultimately, these women made the decision to have an abortion for the same reasons women always have: Their recognition that they could not adequately care for a child at this moment in their lives. This seemed especially true for the more than half of our interviewees who already have children.
This would seem to be a wonderful opportunity to make common cause with the thousands of pregnancy resource centers throughout the country that give free material aid to pregnant women, or with groups like the Sisters of Life, Good Counsel Homes, and Expectant Mother Care that provide a full range of social services — including, if necessary, a safe place to life. No such network exists among pro-choicers to make life a more attractive choice to women in need. A donation to Planned Parenthood does not buy baby clothes, let alone shelter. A donation to NARAL does not pay for a crib.
Instead of calling upon readers to dig into their own pockets like activist pro-lifers do, or pull together to form pro-choice pregnancy centers for women who do not wish to abort their children, Joffe and Cosby call only for solutions requiring more taxes and more regulations. "Affordable housing, living wages, better child care, intimate partner violence programs and universal health care are things the movement must fight for in order to give these women and their children a shot at a decent life," they write.
But even universal health care won't call off these pro-choice dogs. The only real answer, they conclude, is an end to guilt: "And if that weren't enough," they write of their movement goals, "a challenge of a different nature is to make the lonely women in the waiting rooms feel part of that struggle."
In other words, you may be poor, you may be abused, you may have been dumped by the father of your child, say these pro-choicers. We cannot help you. Society is to blame. But we can make you feel that your abortion is part of the reproductive-rights struggle.
Well, it wouldn't be the first time that a preborn child was a martyr. And it wouldn't be the first time that left-wingers told a woman that her position in "the movement" was horizontal.
9:26 PM |
"There are countless books in stores about how to find your soul mate and live happy and wonderful lives. There are countless romantic films about people who have found true love in the most unlikely circumstances and conditions, but the only way to find the right person is to be the right person. You must be willing to put instant gratification on hold for the promise of a permanent and lasting connection and the only way to find true love is to share an intimacy that's beyond the flesh, and yet does not include the flesh. It means having a spiritual foundation in your relationship that does not involve the sharing of body parts but the sharing of a life-giving faith. In short it means trying to give up the chase, in favor of being thrilled by being chaste."
While staying in a hotel the other night, I switched on the TV — a guilty pleasure while traveling, as I deny myself one at home — and magically caught "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" from the beginning. I had never seen it before —my friends will tell you that I am extremely wary of seeing any film made after the Hays Code was discarded — but had been curious about it since learning that Jim Carrey's character was allegedly inspired by a teenage crush of mine.
I found myself transfixed for the entire film, and duly bawled at the end.
Without spoiling it, I can tell you a couple of things that struck me about it. One was its sharp psychological insight into the age-old subject of the Break-Up — like the way Carrey's character, asked to list the problems he had with his ex-girlfriend, begins with serious criticisms that ultimately devolve into laughably petty complaints (she said "liberry" for "library").
But what really impressed me had to do with the fact that earlier in the day, I had finally finished reading Fulton J. Sheen's Three to Get Married. Although the romantic leads in "Eternal Sunshine" are not married, the film's message seemed to echo Sheen's words towards the end of the book:
The essence of married love is not sex, but consent; not animality, but freedom; not a libido, but a choice. If marriage is a love of "the opposite sex," it is selfishness disguised as love. If marriage is love of a person, it is eternity in the garments of time. ... The free choice of another person, against the idea of attraction for one of the opposite sex, is the difference between a true marriage and an unhappy one. But because freedom is the mark of the Spirit which comes from God, a marriage based on consent partakes of Divinity at its very beginning. More than that, it proves that he who freely chooses is also ready for sacrifice.
Much of "Eternal Sunshine," as with most other romantic films, is about the chase — the rush of intensity that accompanies the start of a relationship. Yet, the film is ultimately not about chase, but rather choice, and the ways in which each choice we make either limits or enhances our freedom.
The great and often difficult truth that Sheen articulates is that, when we make choices with a willingness to sacrifice, it is then that we have the most freedom. When, out of a desire to remain free from obligation to another, we run away from the hard choices, it is then that our options are narrowed.
* * *
I have felt for a long time that I should love more —not just in the romantic relationships I have had, but in every relationship.
When I take in Three to Get Married and other works of his, Sheen seems to seize upon this nagging feeling of mine, pointing to a way to become the more loving person I want to be.
The only problem is, he is pointing to the Cross.
He writes in Three to Get Married:
The pagan, seeing the gold mixed with dross, throws away the treasure because he has no knowledge of how to refine it. The Christian, however, can extract the Divine gold from the dross of suffering and thus add to the wealth of his Christian character. Suffering then becomes assimilable to the soul through the power of the Cross. But to the worldling, it becomes a double-cross; inside as an intellectual complexity incapable of solution, and outside as a violent intrusion and disturbance of one's egotism. The man without faith is no more immune from a cross than the man with faith. The difference is that the Christian has only one Cross, which is so understandable, while the egotist has two crosses, whose names are Rebellion and Suffering. A moment can actually be reached by the Christian when his suffering is felt less and less as coming from the outside, or as being imposed on him, and more and more as a failure to accomplish perfectly within himself the Will of God.
* * *
Once, when I was speaking to an assistant manager at a bank, a young woman from India, I noticed she had on her desk a framed drawing of a fantastic-looking elephantine creature.
I made some benign comment about the image. The young woman answered, "That is my god."
"Ganesha?" I asked.
"That's right," she said.
"What's he like?"
"He is not an easy god," she answered simply. "He is very strict with me."
Something about her tone impressed me. She was fostering a devotion to a god who demanded a higher code of behavior of her, one that required her to overcome some of her natural inclinations. I could admire that, even as I wished I could bring myself to tell her about my God.
* * *
The saints are not gods, but each one represents a way to embody God's love, and some ways appear stricter than others. Reading Fulton J. Sheen and trying to live out his path to loving, I can identify with that assistant manager.
At the same time, there is a reward in challenging oneself to make sacrifices — I mean, not just a future reward, but one that can be experienced now, at this moment. I think it is an increasing feeling that, even when one is undergoing pain, one is not alone.
10:49 PM |
It was one of those wretched situations that you hope will never happen when you travel: One day last month, when I was supposed to be heading to Louisville, Ky., to give talks there and in Cincinnati, I got stuck at Newark Liberty Airport's Terminal C for eight hours due to a flight snafu.
When I phoned my seminarian friend Dennis Schenkel, who was set to pick me up at the Louisville airport, he suggested I use some of my free time to visit Jesus.
Huh? I knew the terminal had a "Meditation Room," but I had poked my head in once and didn't recall there being anything in it besides some plastic chairs.
Dennis insisted that it had the Real Presence — a tabernacle containing the consecrated Host.
If you've been to Terminal C and seen this sign ...
... you'll probably agree that the last thing you expect to see in side is a tabernacle.
But, after getting off the phone with Dennis, I went in anyway. Walking past a guy sleeping on a prayer mat, I saw it in the corner ...
... a real-life, honest-to-goodness tabernacle, with the red sanctuary lamp signifying that the consecrated host was within. (The sanctuary lamp has always fascinated me as a Jewish convert, as it is directly descended from the Jewish ner tamid, or eternal flame.)
A sign in the chapel gave times for Mass and other prayer services, as well as a phone number for the airport's chaplain. I did some Internet research when I got home and learned that the chaplain is Father David Baratelli, who has received praise around the world for the way he ministered to workers in the pit at Ground Zero in the days following the 9/11 attacks.
A couple of days ago, I was back at the airport and stopped in to the chapel again. It is positioned almost immediately after the security checkpoint. Going straight from the discomfort and humiliation of a security check to the peace and beauty of Christ's presence feels surreal, like stepping into another world. The chapel's dusty curtains, industrial carpet, and institutional white walls fade away and you just see the mystical brass box with the angels carved on it, along with the Byzantine icon of Jesus.
I prayed a decade of the rosary and then, having to catch my plane, asked Jesus to let His presence stay with me when I finished my rosary on the plane. I know that sounds silly in the sense that He is always with us, but there is something about the physical feeling of being with the Real Presence that makes you want to take it with you. At any rate, my request was granted and I got to finish the rosary while gazing at the clouds outside the window.
RELATED: This entry sparked an entry critical of Eucharistic Adoration by Presbyterian assistant pastor Mark Horne. Check out the discussion in the comments (which includes my two cents).
As guest blogger Henrietta G. Tavish discussed here last week, student journalist Lila Rose went undercover to expose Planned Parenthood's concealment of child rape. She's since been interviewed on "The O'Reilly Factor," where she came off as bright and articulate (and, I'd say, a better TV communicator than her lawyer):
The clip above is taken from Rose's Web site, The Advocate, which also has links to other interviews and news stories regarding her pro-life efforts.
The other day, I sent the wonderful Catholic song parodist Nick Alexander an idea out of the blue, inspired by reading Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen's "Calvary and the Mass" on the train home: Procol Harum's "Conquistador" redone as "Confiteor."
That was the extent of my inspiration; in less than a day and a half, Nick has created a firs draft of the lyrics — and it's brill. Here's a sample:
Confiteor, the start of mass: exactly what I need Before encountering the King, I'll need some purity
So I beat upon my breast And then I bow in shame. Do others feel disgraced Because they know my name?
And yet I pray, Lord, if Thou be inclined To be my Saviour, woe, I'm so blind...
Confiteor's my chance to rid: my apostasy Wonder if my neighbor's kids, are half as bad as me
I wish very much that I could go, but I have a commitment out of town. Just thinking about being unable to attend puts a sad song in my head — to the tune of "Guantanamera": Cantalamessa, I'm missing Cantalamessa ...
"There are churches I don't go to anymore, cafes that hold bitter memories, and parks I won't cut through on my way to a bus stop," she writes.
While everyone's entitled to heal in their own way, I believe that changing one's lifestyle in order to avoid "bitter memories" is Not a Good Idea.
During the times of my life when I've gone through a breakup, it can be very painful to revisit places that recall lost intimacy. But the alternative, avoiding a place where I might ultimately find joy — be it a church of which I'm fond, a café that serves bubble tea, or a beautiful park — is worse. And when it comes to forgoing short cuts, I don't think any emotional pain is worth missing a bus. The old, cynical maxim that "men are like buses" is a base canard, but so too is its corollary; if you miss a bus, there may well not be another one coming around the pike.
That is not to say that I was terribly happy that day, one week after my last breakup, when a magazine photographer phoned to tell me he'd found the perfect spot for his shoot with me that day, a Village café — which happened to be the site of my first date with my former boyfriend. In the ensuing photos (taken at the café and in Washington Square), I looked like a condemned woman on her way to the gallows. But then, the café wasn't a place where I would normally have gone; that first date was the first time I'd been there in years. Avoiding it for a while wouldn't have disrupted my life.
I also don't recommend revisiting music enjoyed with a past love if the pain of separation is still fresh. Music has far more power to stir the emotions than a geographical place. When a piece of classical music that I'd experienced with a former boyfriend popped up on an Internet radio station, I decided I'd listen to it all the way through and thereby purge myself of any painful associations it evoked. Forty minutes later, my computer desk was a minefield of wet tissues — and I still bawled the next time that piece of music hit my ears.
But reclaiming geographical places in order to bring a semblance of normalcy back to your life — that's different. It really is possible to "rebaptize" them, and not just with tears. Go to them determined to exorcise the ghost who resides there. It stings the first time. The second time, the pain goes down to a dull ache, and then it falls off steeply. Pretty soon, you'll be much better off than if you did the avoidance thing — partly because you'll no longer be deprived of places you like, and partly because the avoidance itself only reopens the wound. The mental energy required to consciously avoid a place causes painful memories to arise afresh.
More than that, it's important to get beyond thinking in terms of "places we went/places where we didn't go." If you're determined to avoid places with painful associations, think about what you're doing in the places where you don't have such associations. If you're simply seeking relief and distraction, then you're still turned in upon yourself, as your life continues to be ruled by the empty space. Sometimes it may be better to feel the empty space. At least then, recognizing your own limitations, you may eventually reach a place where you can make something good of your pain — by removing your focus from yourself and reaching out to others who are hurting.
Don't worry about what people will think at the places where you and your former love hung out. If the waiter asks about your former love, tell him you broke up. He won't ask you again — and you might even get an extra biscotti.
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen on Calvary and the Mass
[Note: I found the Bishop Sheen essay excerpted below while searching for writings on how to be thankful for one's crosses. The article from which it comes is stunning and I highly recommend reading it in its entirety. The prayer (which is all-capitals in the original) is reminiscent of St. Ignatius of Loyola's prayer: "Take, O Lord, and receive my entire liberty, my memory, my understanding and my whole will. All that I am and all that I possess You have given me. I surrender it all to You to be disposed of according to Your will. Give me only Your love and Your grace; with these I will be rich enough, and will desire nothing more." — Dawn]
As the consecration of the Mass draws near our Lord is equivalently saying to us: "You, Mary; you, John; you, Peter; and you, Andrew-you, all of you-give Me your body; give Me your blood. Give Me your whole self! I can suffer no more. I have passed through My cross, I have filled up the sufferings of My physical body, but I have not filled up the sufferings wanting to My Mystical Body, in which you are. The Mass is the moment when each one of you may literally fulfill My injunction: 'Take up your cross and follow Me.'"
On the cross our Blessed Lord was looking forward to you, hoping that one day you would be giving yourself to Him at the moment of consecration. Today, in the Mass, that hope our Blessed Lord entertained for you is fulfilled. When you assist at the Mass He expects you now actually to give Him yourself. ...
... Such is the purpose of life! To redeem ourselves in union with Christ; to apply His merits to our souls by being like Him in all things, even to His death on the Cross. He passed through His consecration on the Cross that we might now pass through ours in the Mass. There is nothing more tragic in all the world than wasted pain.
Think of how much suffering there is in hospitals, among the poor, and the bereaved. Think also of how much of that suffering goes to waste! How many of those lonesome, suffering, abandoned, crucified souls are saying with our Lord at the moment of consecration, "This is my body. Take it"? And yet that is what we all should be saying at that second:
I GIVE MYSELF TO GOD. HERE IS MY BODY. TAKE IT. HERE IS MY BLOOD. TAKE IT. HERE IS MY SOUL, MY WILL, MY ENERGY, MY STRENGTH, MY PROPERTY, MY WEALTH-ALL THAT I HAVE. IT IS YOURS. TAKE IT! CONSECRATE IT! OFFER IT! OFFER IT WITH THYSELF TO THE HEAVENLY FATHER IN ORDER THAT HE, LOOKING DOWN ON THIS GREAT SACRIFICE, MAY SEE ONLY THEE, HIS BELOVED SON, IN WHOM HE IS WELL PLEASED. TRANSMUTE THE POOR BREAD OF MY LIFE INTO THY DIVINE LIFE; THRILL THE WINE OF MY WASTED LIFE INTO THY DIVINE SPIRIT; UNITE MY BROKEN HEART WITH THY HEART; CHANGE MY CROSS INTO A CRUCIFIX. LET NOT MY ABANDONMENT AND MY SORROW AND MY BEREAVEMENT GO TO WASTE. GATHER UP THE FRAGMENTS, AND AS THE DROP OF WATER IS ABSORBED BY THE WINE AT THE OFFERTORY OF THE MASS, LET MY LIFE BE ABSORBED IN THINE; LET MY LITTLE CROSS BE ENTWINED WITH THY GREAT CROSS SO THAT I MAY PURCHASE THE JOYS OF EVERLASTING HAPPINESS IN UNION WITH THEE.
"CONSECRATE THESE TRIALS OF MY LIFE WHICH WOULD GO UNREWARDED UNLESS UNITED WITH THEE; TRANSUBSTANTIATE ME SO THAT LIKE BREAD WHICH IS NOW THY BODY, AND WINE WHICH IS NOW THY BLOOD, I TOO MAY BE WHOLLY THINE. I CARE NOT IF THE SPECIES REMAIN, OR THAT, LIKE THE BREAD AND THE WINE I SEEM TO ALL EARTHLY EYES THE SAME AS BEFORE. MY STATION IN LIFE, MY ROUTINE DUTIES, MY WORK, MY FAMILY-ALL THESE ARE BUT THE SPECIES OF MY LIFE WHICH MAY REMAIN UNCHANGED; BUT THE OF MY LIFE, MY SOUL, MY MIND, MY WILL, MY HEART-TRANSUBSTANTIATE THEM, TRANSFORM THEM WHOLLY INTO THY SERVICE, SO THAT THROUGH ME ALL MAY KNOW HOW SWEET IS THE LOVE OF CHRIST. AMEN.
If you're in or near Washington, D.C., would you like to have a Dawn Patrol blog-reader party — or, ifyou're ablogger, just an old-fashioned blogger party — on the evening of Tuesday, May 29, around 7:30 p.m. or so? I was thinking we could meet up at a coffeehouse or pub, some laid-back place that serves food.
Should you be up for it, please leave your "ayes" and your meeting-place suggestions here, and leave your e-mail address so I can write invitees with my top-secret choice of location. Not planning a huge public shebang; the readers I invite will most likely be those I already know from their Dawn Patrol comments or their blogs. I just thought it would be fun for those of us who have been following one another's exploits online to finally meet.
For you early risers out there, I'll be discussing The Thrill of the Chaste at 6:40 a.m. this coming Monday on Gus Lloyd's "Seize the Day" show, on the Sirius Catholic Channel. I'll also give a sneak preview of my talk at next month's Chesterton Conference in St. Paul, Minn.: "The Girl Who Was Thirsty: How G.K. Chesterton Opened the Door to My Conversion."
Next week is also expected to bring the publication of :BustedHalo.com's interview with me, conducted by editor-in-chief Bill McGarvey, in both print and podcast form.
Bill is a friend from my rock-critic days; it was a delight being interviewed by him. He is a talented musician and songwriter with one of the most gorgeous voices of anyone I know; it always reminded me of the Hollies' Allan Clarke. Here's a creative video medley of songs that he performs with his backing band the Good Thieves (nice little Gospels reference, that) on his most recent release :Tell Your Mother; the last tune in the medley reminds me of the Byrds' "The Girl With No Name":
A reader writes that, his engagement having ended, he is now "back to the proverbial square 1 on another Web site, resigned to go through the whole process of being stood up, ignored, and made to jump through the same old hoops all over again."
I assume that he's talking about the experience of online personals, one which I know all too well. I wish I could say that I no longer belong to a personals site, but the last one I joined was like the "Catholic singles" version of a Roach Motel™. After charging me a small fortune for a "lifetime membership," it gave me no option to quit once I realized I was wasting my lifetime searching its membership. Now I am forever on the site's membership rolls as "temporarily inactive" — as though I plan at any moment to return to waste precious hours that I will never get back. No thanks.
My advice for anyone who is looking with dread at having to "go through the whole process" of online dating is to do an experiment, just for tonight.
During the time when you would normally sign on to a personals site and check your messages, don't; just let the messages sit. (Believe me, anyone who is truly interested in you will forgive you for taking a day to get back to them. If they fall in love with someone else in the meantime, you'll know it wasn't meant to be.)
Pick three requests from the first page of results. Click on each one, read the whole request, and then pray for the requester's intentions, according to God's will.
That's it.
I guarantee you that if you do that tonight, then tomorrow you will be closer to entering into a happy, lasting marriage than you would be if you spent the entire evening IMing someone on a personals site. What's more, you will be better prepared spiritually for meeting your spouse during the course of your everyday, non-websurfing life.
Planned Parenthood has always valued the right to lie over the right to life. The principle is apparent in their recent litigation threat against student journalist Lila Rose for exposing the organization's attempt to cover up child rape. Not surprisingly, to protect its deceptions the abortion provider is invoking the notion of "privacy" as it emanates from the penumbras of some technical provisions of the Califonia Penal Code.
PP's complaint is that Miss Rose recorded her own "confidential communication" with a counselor who told her to "figure out a birth date that works" to circumvent state laws governing the reporting of statutory rape. (Miss Rose, 18, had posed as an 15 year old impregnated by a 23 year old boyfriend). In most states, Rose's conduct would be perfectly legal – the majority have adopted "one party consent" eavesdropping statutes which permit the recording of any conversation so long as any party to it (including the party taping) consents. It's a sensible rule -- after all, "eavesdropping" traditionally involves snooping by an unknown thirty party. But absent some special privilege -- doctor/patient, lawyer/client -- one has no genuine expectation of privacy or confidentiality from a person with whom one voluntarily engages in conversation. Either side can publicize the discussion as broadly as desired. Even where some privilege exists, it generally only binds one side; the patient or client can reveal it freely.
And indeed, Miss Rose was and is perfectly entitled to tell anyone about her chat with the rape-concealing counselor. For all the carping in PP's whiny and disingenuous lawyer-letter, its legal claim is based narrowly on a violation of California's Invasion of Privacy Act, which actually has nothing whatsoever to do with privacy. Penal Code Section 632 prohibits recording, which Rose undeniably did, but nothing prohibited her from going undercover, procuring the counselor's incriminating statement and revealing its substance to the world in any non-electronic form. There was nothing remotely private about the exchange itself.
So what PP is seeking to protect is not its right to privacy but its right to lie effectively. Without the recording, PP would have denied the conversation entirely or claimed that Rose "misheard" or "misinterpreted" what was said. Now, however, it's been reduced to the pathetic claim that it was "manipulated" into violating the rape reporting statutes.
Rose has wisely agreed to return the tapes and thus end the legal aspect of the dispute, despite what I suspect might have been some effective statutory and First Amendment defenses. (Insofar as at least one California appeals court has rejected a free press claim by a television station which videotaped its sting of a physician misprescribing drugs, the litigation would have necessarily been protracted). But as Jill Stanek reports, Rose will be on The O'Reilly Factor tonight. Why PP invited the upcoming avalanche of negative publicity with its lawsuit threat is uncertain, but I have some idea. Most likely, it may be seeking to chill future investigations by spreading lies and confusion on a national forum. Watch for PP flacks who try to demonize Rose by suggesting that her undercover tactics were illegal -- they were not -- and by leaving the misimpression that recording conversations is generally unlawful, rather than just in California and a few other states. With the words "child rape" permeating the air it will certainly be a hard sell, perhaps even for an organization in the business of marketing death.
At the Archdiocese of New York's Young Adult Holy Hour last night in St. Patrick's beautiful Our Lady chapel, a thought came to me during Eucharistic Adoration that I didn't want to hear:
"Be thankful for your crosses."
I realized that if I want to have a closer walk with Jesus, I have to thank him for the burdens in my life, particularly the ones for which, for whatever reason, I lack the power to shed.
It's not a message that, I think, anyone particularly wants to hear, but I believe it's consistent with Scripture. More than that, I believe that if I heed it — really thank God for the crosses that I carry — it could help me have a deeper relationship with the Lord, because I will be better conformed to His will.
I also believe in praying for God to remove my crosses. But if He's taking His time doing so, perhaps it's because I haven't experienced them fully yet. The only way to do that is to be thankful for them, regardless of whether He gave them to me or whether they are my own fault. In either case, He permitted me to carry them.
Most of all, I plan to thank God today for my crosses because, while it's not unbiblical, it feels so wrong. It goes completely against what I want to pray, as do other scriptural imperatives, like praying for my enemies. And that's why I suspect it's what I need.
An interview I did with Bill Feltner of Pilgrim Radio airs today on the network's "His People" show. You can hear it online at pilgrimradio.com at 3:05 p.m. today and also 12:05 a.m. tomorrow Eastern time.
Reading a blog entry by Seraphic Single on her recent breakup with her boyfriend reminds me of my own breakup, not so long ago, one that was, like hers, sudden and unexpected.
It was the first time since my pre-Christian days — back when I suffered from depression — that I went through a breakup that wasn't my idea. Many of the familiar pains and fears re-emerged, like the wholly irrational yet frighteningly convincing fear that this relationship was the Last Time Ever that I will experience reciprocal more-than-physical attraction. So too came resentments, such as anger at God because marriage has thus far been denied me.
What's changed most obviously since I suffered from depression is that sadness, resentment, and loneliness don't deprive me of the will to live. That alone is something for which I'll always be grateful; healing from hopelessness remains the most visible fruit of the faith that transformed my life.
More than that, however, I take my breakup differently then I would have in the past, in that I have a certain resolve not to force any sense out of it. I'm not trying to convince myself that I won't make the same mistakes again (though that would be nice). Nor am I trying to focus on the relationship's many joyful moments. Those joyful moments now appear like a few golden threads woven into a mourning veil; they're meaningless when detached from the relationship's decidedly unhappy ending. The closest thing to a positive message that can be derived from the experience is that I didn't marry someone who clearly was not the one God intended for me.
Once the burden of finding an instructive moral in it is removed, the breakup becomes meaningful, because my pain is reduced to its basic elements.
I need to be reminded of my dependence upon God for everything. Feeling hurt and lonely reminds me of that dependence. In order to more deeply experience God's love, I need to be loving towards others. But if I'm to be loving towards others, I can't be bitter. To not be bitter, I need to shed my resentment towards those who have hurt me, as well as my resentment towards God.
Essentially, then, for me, the major difference between experiencing romantic disappointment without faith and experiencing it with faith is a refusal to increase in bitterness. It may seem easier to slide into bitterness than to fight its onset, but I've experienced enough bitterness to know that it's not a condition in which I would want to remain — not if there's the slightest chance I might instead learn to better love my neighbor.
The other day, I spoke on the phone with an 80-year-old man who contacted me after reading an interview I gave. He told me that he and his wife were touched by what I said about God's plan for marital love.
The caller went on to tell me that his wife was bedridden following an aneurysm — one which the doctors had believed would kill her, except that it didn't. She remained the love of his life. He spoke feelingly of how he loved every moment of caring for her.
As I listened to the man, I thought about how I longed to be in a marriage fueled by that kind of love. But more than that, I realized, when I am 80, I want to be able to have that kind of love, period. Whether I am taking care of my husband or being cared for by him, or whether I am unmarried and in the company of friends, family, or strangers, I want to be able to love other people the way that Jesus loves me.
Pursuing such an ideal, in and of itself, still doesn't make the aftermath of a breakup easier. At the same time, there is something strangely comforting in the idea that, when I am feeling emotionally overburdened, I may yet withstand an additional cross.
Some of my favorite moments since my breakup are times when I was being present for others in their needs. Those times haven't been frequent enough, to be sure, but they gave me opportunities to grow more human.
Really, the most obvious reason for why one would have to go through a breakup, as with any pain, is to be better able to console others. As to why such pain should exist in the first place, well, there's the first few chapters of Genesis to explain that one. Better yet, there's the non-explanation given by the Book of Job, of which G.K. Chesterton said, "The refusal of God to explain His design is itself a burning hint of His design. The riddles of God are more satisfying than the solutions of man."
The Halifax Chronicle Herald has an article remembering the mother of the Canadian Anglican blogger known as Binky the WebElf. Susan Jane Taylor was killed when the car in which she was a passenger crashed on Mother's Day, also her 65th birthday.
Binky has an entry about her on his blog, along with a link to another blog where condolences may be left. Please pray for him and everyone touched by this horrible tragedy.
"Part memoir, part self-help guide, The Thrill of the Chaste provides a joyous rebuttal to a culture obsessed with sex. ...
"The autobiographical scenes are beautifully and humorously written, inspiring sympathy and admiration. Some of the best pars of the book are the scenes that discuss heart-wrenching breakups with unflinching irony, coupled with musings on how Eden uses these unpleasant experiences to determine what she truly wants out of a relationship. ... Passages that focus on her adoption of Christian sexual ethics draw heavily on personal experience, allowing her defense of chastity to be more heartfelt than preachy as she sets about demolishing Helen Gurley Brown's legacy.
"This book is geared for adults, but parents will find it an invaluable resource for teaching their children about the emotional dangers of sex. ... An effective argument for chastity has to explain why, whatever feelings of pleasure unsanctified intercourse might provide, these are far outweighed by the damage that the 'it's just sex' mentality inflicts, leaving people bereft and unfulfilled.
"One of the biggest hurdles toward advancing the virtues of a chaste lifestyle is the widely accepted dichotomy between the notion that people who engage in wanton sex are mentally healthy and 'sexually liberated,' and the idea that people who abstein are 'sexually repressed' and only refrain due to some unresolved neurosis. Eden brilliantly illustrates how what is commonly defined as 'liberation' is really a kind of enslavement, since in order to participate in this lifestyle, one has to set up all sorts of emotional and psychological barricades, the likes of which, she reports from experience, are very difficult to overcome. Similarly, by presenting the happiness and self-respect gained from chastity, she punctures the lie that abstinence is unnatural and unhealthy."
— Christopher Chan reviews The Thrill of the Chaste for Gilbert, the American Chesterton Society magazine (review is not online). Come see me next month at the Chesterton Society conference in St. Paul, Minn.
"The world needs transparent lives, clear souls, pure minds that refuse to be perceived as mere objects of pleasure. It is necessary to oppose those elements of the media that ridicule the sanctity of marriage and virginity before marriage."
WASHINGTON DC, May 14 — Stunned by a video showing a frail, 91-year old women's rights organization being tricked into the non-reporting of a statutory rape, Sen. Henry Waxman (D.-Ca) has proposed a bill to prohibit the surreptitious taping of what actually goes on in Planned Parenthood abortion clinics.
In the tape, UCLA student journalist Lila Rose visits a Planned Parenthood center posing as a 15-year-old impregnated by her 23-year-old boyfriend. There, an employee counsels Rose to lie about her age to obtain an abortion without the clinic having to report the statutory rape to the police. "You could say 16 . . . just figure out a birth date that works," said the counselor.
Kathy Kneer, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California expressed outrage that Rose and her male accomplice conspired to "manipulate" and "discredit" the aging abortion provider. "It's bad enough that our senior citizens are routinely fleeced of their savings by sweepstakes, home repair and mortgage scams," she said. "But now they're being robbed of their very dignity by unscrupulous individuals who con them into violating rape reporting laws." Tracy Clark-Flory of Salon.com's Broadsheet likewise condemned the "undercover attack" on the elderly non-profit, who is living on a fixed income of $272.7 million in governmental subsidies.
To combat the problem, Senator Waxman has proposed "Maggie's Law." Named for Planned Parenthood's eugenicist founder Margaret Sanger, the legislation would prohibit the creation or dissemination of any videotape of an entrapped abortion facilitator failing to report child rape. Noting that that many elderly victims decline to report scams against them out of a sense of shame, Waxman said "it would be terrible if the mere failure to report a crime became a source of humiliation, particularly where the offense itself is procured by a conniving little jailbait temptress." The Senator pointed to a lawsuit in which Planned Parenthood is being forced to defend itself against charges that it provided an abortion and bill control pills to a girl impregnated by her father without contracting the authorities.
A draft amendment to the bill would also prohibit the broadcast of MSNBC Dateline's To Catch A Predator -- on the theory that the exposure of the identities of men who seduce prepubescent minors in internet chat rooms might lead to embarrassing publicity for Planned Parenthood if the girls are later brought to its clinics for remedial measures. However, the law would not affect Waxman's own undercover attacks on crisis pregnancy centers, insofar as those organizations "are also dedicated to the humiliation and impoverishment of Planned Parenthood."
[Editor's note: For those who didn't catch on, the preceding is satire, written by a guest blogger.]
Please read the post that Binks of the Web Elf Report and CANN wrote about his mother's death in a Mother's Day car accident, and pray for him and his family.
My friend Drusilla says she's never seen TV footage of Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. For her, thanks to a stranger who posted it on YouTube, here is a clip from one of the then-bishop's "Life Is Worth Living" shows of the mid-1950s, on suffering:
Note how he backs away from the blackboard so his guardian angel can replace it with a clean one. He always said it was his angel who changed his blackboards.
Last night, at the wonderful Ball for Life, I was introduced to a slightly bewildered Celeste Holm, who is 90 years old and still beautiful. Here she is back in 1956 with Frank:
I told the grande dame that my book, which I was toting (natch), was intended for single women who had not been chaste — to show them how they could change their lives.
It was then that the expression of the star, who's currently on husband No. 5, changed to one of full bewilderment —with a hint of distaste. She paused a moment and asked simply: "Why would they want to do that?"
[Many thanks to those who attended my talk last night; it was a great pleasure to speak to the club and meet people there. Because I speak most frequently to Christian audiences, this talk was an opportunity to emphasize psychological and moral arguments for chastity rather than religious teachings (though I didn't completely avoid discussing faith). — Dawn]
Good evening.
I’d like to thank Daniel Peterson, Robert Hornak, and the rest of the Young Republican leadership for having me here tonight. Since my book came out last December, I’ve been speaking about it throughout the country, including Dallas, Cincinnati, and Washington , D.C., but it’s always a thrill to speak in my hometown. I’m especially happy to be speaking to young Republicans, being one myself.
As a matter of fact, it’s unusually appropriate for me to be speaking here about chastity, because when I first attended New York Young Republican meetings about five years ago, right here in this very room, I came here with the intention of finding a sex partner.
Now, I didn’t think of it that way. I thought that I might meet a man I might date, and that as we got closer, we would begin to fall in love, and as we did that, we would have sex, and all that would eventually lead us to wedding vows. But it didn’t happen that way. Why it didn’t happen is one of the subjects of my book.
First, I should explain what chastity is. It’s most often confused with abstinence, but the two are not the same.
Part of chastity entails the proper ordering of sexual pleasure – which does mean having sex only with marriage. But more than that, chastity is really a way to look at all your relationships so that they no longer become mere exchanges of commodities.
Abstinence is ultimately a negative, because it focuses on avoidance. Chastity is positive, because it focuses upon personal growth. It requires learning to view others as unique individuals, rather than objects. It takes into account human dignity. It means a level of respect that is light-years beyond, “I’ll still respect you in the morning.”
The character qualities chastity develops — including patience, temperance, and selflessness — are essential for a lasting marriage. For that reason, the married who follow the ideals of chastity, even though they have sex, may still be called “chaste.”
People ask me why I wrote a book on chastity for the unmarried. My first answer is that, back when I first made the decision to stop having sex until I’m married, I had no guidance. There was nobody I knew my own age who had made such a radical change, and there were no books by women who had quit the “Sex and the City” lifestyle. So, once I got the hang of chastity and found it was truly more fulfilling than sex outside marriage, I wanted to spread the word – first with my blog, The Dawn Patrol, and then with my book.
But there’s another reason why I started blogging up a storm about chastity. At the time I started writing about it, three years ago, I was known as a pro-life blogger. My blogging made me a favorite target of feminist bloggers like Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, who would spout torrents of four-letter words about what a horrible wingnut I was for upholding life.
Once I started blogging about chastity, those same feminist bloggers became livid. They could make easy fun of Christians who touted virginity and abstinence ‘til marriage. But for a former New York City hipster who had reveled in a life of nonmarital sex to turn around and say, “Guess what, ladies – you’ve been cheated” – that was more than Amanda and her pals could bear.
As you know, being Republicans in New York City, there is the so-called counterculture – the feminists, global-warming fanatics, gay-marriage proponents, abortion activists, and so on – and then there is the real counterculture. The real counterculture are those who are working to preserve the moral values that are at the foundation of western civilization. As a longtime rebel, I was attracted to chastity because where the real counterculture lies, chastity is pretty close to ground zero.
“The Thrill of the Chaste” is aimed primarily at single women – although I’ve been very happy to learn that men get something out of it too. It’s the first book on chastity written by a woman whose chastity is the result of a lifestyle transformation.
I grew up Reform Jewish. My parents split up when I was five, and I was raised by my mother. Like a lot of divorcees in the 1970s, my mother set about trying to find herself. She tried to find herself through various New Age movements – and through various men.
As a child, watching my mother go from one guru to another, I got disillusioned and I lost what little faith I had. But what stayed with me was what my mother taught me by her sexual behavior. By her sleeping over at her boyfriends’ homes, my mother taught me that sex was just something grown-ups did because they wanted to. Marriage had nothing to do with it. There was nothing sacred about marriage, and nothing sacred about sex.
When I left home for NYU, it seemed like the whole world echoed with the messages I had learned growing up. Practically all the major movies, all the network TV shows, all the women’s magazines presented sex in a consumeristic fashion.
Now, I know that sex sells, but we as Republicans believe that human beings were not made to be bought and sold; we were the first party to recognize that. Yet the message popular culture gives to young and old is that sex is simply one more item on the consumption menu of life. We are taught to think of sex as something we deserve, and our sex partners are simply giving us what we deserve.
No human being ever deserves to use or be used by another human being for physical pleasure. The only way to experience another person’s presence without devaluing that person or yourself is to experience him or her as a gift. That philosophy of the human being as gift has been expressed by major world religions – most notably by Pope John Paul II with his Theology of the Body – but it’s not something you’re going to find in Cosmo or Maxim, let alone the New York Times.
When I was sexually active, I believed that being open to premarital sex would bring me closer to marriage. One of the basic tenets of the sexual revolution is that sex should push the relationship. Accordingly, I had believed that no man would marry me unless I had sex with him. I believed that there was nothing intrinsically valuable about me that could possibly make a man willing to wait to have sex with me until we were married.
Did I think that sex and love should be connected? Sure. But if it wasn’t, that was OK. As far as I could see, based on the messages I received not only from the media and popular culture, but from my own friends and family, the only necessary emotional requirement for having sex was respect. As long as my partner and I “respected” one another, no one could deny us our pleasure.
Well, that last part is true, of course. I had free will, and no one could stop me from making my own decisions.
And I had pleasure. But something was missing. It took me years to understand what it was. What was missing was joy.
When I was 31, I underwent a dramatic conversion to Christianity. My new faith put my lifestyle in a new perspective. I realized for the first that all the sex I ever had, far from bringing me closer to marriage, had actually taken me further away from even being able to sustain a relationship that would lead to marriage.
In fact, I believe that sex outside marriage is by its very nature emotionally and spiritually damaging – and I believe that’s true even within a committed relationship. Here’s why: when you have sex, two things are going on – the physical and the emotional. Physically, you’re engaging in the most self-sacrificing act that your body can achieve. Physically, you’re saying, “I give myself to you completely, without reservation. Take my skin, take my sweat, take my breathing, take what’s inside of me.”
Now, emotionally, if you’re not vowed to your sex partner for life, then you know – and your partner knows – that no matter how much you may love one another, you each have an easy out. I don’t care how much people talk about how you can’t be certain a marriage will last forever – I know that better than anyone, because my parents split up when I was in kindergarten – the fact remains that, if you haven’t signed that piece of paper, it is far easier to walk out the door and say, “See ya!” than if you have.
I knew when I was having sex outside marriage that even as I was pouring out my body completely to my partner, I could not pour out my heart and give it all to him as a gift. If there was the slightest chance that we might not get married – and until you’ve gone through with it, there always is – then it would be too painful.
So I learned to build up a shell. Just a little shell, I thought, just to protect myself from getting hurt. But every time I had sex with my partner, I would feel more bonded to him because of the sex – just the sheer biochemistry of sex creates a bonding feeling. So I would have to detach further. It was a terrible, sick irony that the very sex that I believed would bring me closer to my partner in fact prevented me from truly giving myself to him.
After my conversion, realizing that my lifestyle was in opposition to my values as a new Christian, I knew I had to change. At first, I was bitter and resentful about it. I would think, “OK, God, I’m doing this for you, and you’d better appreciate it, because it is hard.” but I quickly found that I couldn’t stay chaste if I thought that way.
Gradually, I stopped looking at my life through the lenses of entitlement and started to look at it – and especially other people – as a gift. Now, I’ll go to social gatherings and instead of thinking like I had before – “I better have chemistry with some man here, otherwise it’s a waste” – I’m simply determined to enjoy myself.
Likewise, instead of focusing on getting the attention of the men who interest me, I’ll talk to everyone, men and women – learn something, make new friends, enjoy their presence and discover something to appreciate about them.
That’s why I think it’s a lie when people say chastity narrows your world. I had a narrow world before I was chaste. I lived with blinders on, like the “Sex and the City” characters who are always on the prowl. Chastity has opened my world, changing me from being jaded to having a sense of wonder and gratitude.
My notes end here, but I said one more thing to the group — the story of the devil and the Agatha Christie novels in "Bedazzled" that I tell in the YouTube video below (from a talk in Cleveland last February). However, instead of stressing "pleasure" when describing the "last page," as I do in this video, I said more accurately that the "last page" is not only pleasure, but joy.
GUEST POST — Giuliani: 'I Hate Giving to Planned Parenthood'By HENRIETTA G. TAVISH Special to The Dawn Patrol
NEW YORK, May 10 — Having previously declared that he "hates" abortion, Republican presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani yesterday expressed an equal hatred of donating to Planned Parenthood. The statement was prompted by the revelation that the former New York City mayor and his then-wife made at least six contributions to the nation's largest abortion provider in the 1990's.
"Abortion is the unjustified taking of a human life," said Giuliani. "I hate the practice, and I hate when the government funds it -- but what I hate most of all is when I voluntarily send money to organizations that perform it despite the fact that I am under no obligation whatsoever to do so."
Giuliani explained that he was personally opposed to his contributions but made them as a matter of conscience. "I cannot impose my morality upon anyone, including myself," he said. He added that if elected president there would be nothing he would hate more than appointing pro-abortion judges to the Supreme Court.
11:21 PM |
"Sedaka [describing the writing of 'Love Will Keep Us Together'] skirts right over the part where someone writes actual words, and instead talks about how he won a Grammy in the wake of The Captain & Tennille’s big hit single.
"Howard Greenfield also won a Grammy for that one — but why bring that up? Sedaka wakes up every morning and finds words left under his pillow. It’s a blessing."
"While Eden is targeting women who are moving from unchastity to chastity, the book will also be of interest to a broader group of readers. It may even be of interest to single men who wonder why their dates seem hard-edged or who themselves feel pressured by contemporary women into illicit sexual activity. ...
"Likewise, Eden’s emphasis on hope rings true for marriage-minded singles regardless of their history. 'A woman with the courage to step out into the unknown, risking temporary loneliness for a shot at lasting joy, is more than a "single." She’s singular. Instead of defining herself by what she lacks – a relationship with a man – she defines herself by what she has: a relationship with God.'
"Nevertheless, parents and grandparents who might consider this book as a gift for a young person need to be aware that the content assumes a certain loss of innocence in the reader, that she has already 'realized … that (she) could separate sexual sensation from love.' Eden shares more specific personal details at the beginning and especially at the end of the book than what a student might typically hear from a pro-life conference chastity speaker. While the book is not suitable for adolescents, it may be helpful to mature young adults who are resisting the secular concepts of 'hooking up' and 'friends with benefits.'"
Daniel Bayless, whom I had the pleasure of meeting when I spoke in Manchester, N.H. — he directs the music ministry for St. Joseph Cathedral there — took this arresting photo. He explains:
The reliquaries belong to St. Joseph Cathedral, but a parish in the diocese had called to borrow them for a liturgy they were doing. Apparently, when they were returned, they were taken to the extremely busy sacristy during Easter week. Of course, after doing the gamut of liturgies during the Triduum, every spare inch of counter space was taken up with everything from consecrated chrism to chalices to stoles — basically every liturgical vessel or object imaginable. Apparently, the only space into which these relics would fit was a luggage stand with a tray on top.
I was taking one of my many daily trips from my office in the rectory to the organ loft in the cathedral and happened upon the pile of reliquaries as you see them in the photo. I had the thought that only in the cathedral sacristy would reliquaries be such everyday objects. Not that it was meant in an impious manner, but that's the reality of the liturgical life around this place. We barely have time to recover from one before the next begins!
Having met the rector and others who are part of the St. Joseph parish, I can vouch that there is nothing impious about the place — and methinks it has far more saints than could fit on a plate.
12:16 AM |
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
GUEST POST: Grave reviews
By Kevin Walsh
Entertainment Weekly's Owen Gleiberman isn't the only reviewer to be puzzled about why Keri Russell's character in "Waitress" doesn't opt for the "obvious solution" when she finds herself pregnant by her husband, who she no longer loves:
"Married to an angry, jealous control freak (Jeremy Sisto), Jenna has just learned that she's pregnant, and she's miserable about it — though in this deep-dish comedy of red-state blues, the possibility of terminating the pregnancy is never even discussed."
I don't know, perhaps the late Adrienne Shelley wrote the film with the opinion that there are better solutions than that ...
"Eden points out that contrary to what the sexual/feminist revolution tried to pass off as the way to liberation and self-fulfillment, casual sexual encounters have left in their wake broken hearts and broken homes. And as hard as it is to imagine, broken hearts and homes are good for business. For where do people turn when they discover that the promises of the sexual/feminist revolution are lies; consumerism. I'm amazed that I haven't heard anyone say anything like this before. It's the old adage of detective work, 'Follow the money.'"
"When people spend more time planning the wedding than planning their marriage, it is no surprise when the marriage fails because no one bothered to plan for it. ...
"When people spend more time investing and trying to obtain what it is they do not have than investing in what they already have, it is no surprise that a marriage goes bankrupt because nothing was invested in it. "
"For the modern world will accept no dogmas upon any authority; but it will accept any dogmas on no authority. Say that a thing is so, according to the Pope or the Bible, and it will be dismissed as a superstition without examination. But preface your remark merely with 'they say' or 'don't you know that?' or try (and fail) to remember the name of some professor mentioned in some newspaper; and the keen rationalism of the modern mind will accept every word you say."
For all the 20-year-olds who've heard me joke in my speeches about how "chastity isn't something you hear about on TV ... unless you, like me, grew up watching Sonny and Cher," this is what I'm talking about:
The clip brings back some of my earliest memories (as well as the more recent ones of "Groundhog Day").
I was just six months older than Chastity, and we looked pretty similar at the time, both of us being chubby little blonde kids (that's me at right). Most of all, I remember liking the fact that Chastity's parents sang "I Got You Babe" together with her in tow. There was something about that image of a supportive family that I longed for, as my mother and father were having marital problems at that time. As it happened, I was six months ahead of Chastity in the divorced-parents department as well.
On the upside, a few decades later, I did find joy in chastity (the lower-case kind) — and like Chastity Bono's dad (whose "I Got You Babe" echoes "Chimes of Freedom"), had some fun with a Bob Dylan tune, with help from my friends.
While I'm still hoping for a Thrill of the Chaste movie, Hollywood comes calling this Thursday night, May 10, when a crew for a documentary produced by a "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "Star Wars" producer will film my speech to the New York Young Republican Club.
The documentary is about the politics of abortion in America — a subject completely absent from my book, which makes no mention of abortion. I believe the filmmakers are interested in me because of my having taken a public stand for life. Also, I believe they are aware that, while one need not be pro-life to be chaste, the chastity movement is an essential part of the pro-life movement, just as the movement for so-called comprehensive sexual education is an essential part of the abortion-advocacy movement.
One always takes a chance when one participates in a documentary such as this. However, the filmmakers have told me that they want to depict all sides of the issue, and their track record leads me to believe that they are making a serious film and not a diatribe.
The documentary's producer is Howard G. Kazanjian, whose film credits go all the way back to "Finian's Rainbow" (!). His previous productions include "More American Graffiti," "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (executive producer), and "Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi."
Kajanjian won't be at the Young Republicans meeting, but one crew member who will be there is cameraman Todd Fisher, who's spent much of his life behind the camera and occasionally in front of it.
I hope you can make it to the meeting, which will also feature speakers Star Parker, founder of CURE, and Richmond County DA Daniel M. Donovan. It's at the Soldiers', Sailors', Marines' and Airmens' Club, 283 Lexington Ave. (between 36th and 37th streets), 2nd floor, Manhattan, this Thursday at 7:15 p.m. Admission is free for NYYRC members, $5 for nonmembers, and $2 for students.
When I was a nondenominational Protestant, I don't believe that there was anything anyone could have told me about Catholics' veneration of Mary that would have made me venerate her right then and there. However, now that I am a member of the Church, I do believe that there are certain things Catholics could have told me about such veneration that would have given me real food for thought — instead of putting me off, as did many of the arguments that were offered to me.
Mainly, I wish that, instead of giving me the various "cute" reasons and other arguments as to why Catholics love and pray to Jesus' mother, someone had instead explained to Mary's unique relationship with the Holy Spirit. The relationship resembles a spousal one, because Mary conceived of the Holy Spirit. However, the term "spouse" is inadequate to describe the Holy Spirit in relation to Mary, as Father Dwight P. Campbell observes in an article about St. Maximilian Kolbe's writings on Mary (a k a the "Immaculata"):
In matrimony a man and woman become united through sacramental grace so as to become, in a mystical way, "one flesh." But Kolbe sees the union between Mary and the Holy Spirit being even more intimate than that of spouses in marriage:
"Among creatures made in God's image, the union brought about by married love is the most intimate of all. In a much more precise, more interior, more essential manner, the Holy Spirit lives in the soul of the Immaculata, in the depths of her very being."
As a Protestant, it never occurred to me to ponder whether the Holy Spirit had any relationship with Mary beyond conceiving Jesus within her. I believe now that if someone had asked me to consider Mary's fate, I would have had a hard time accepting that the Holy Spirit, after entering Mary, would simply leave her upon Jesus' birth.
I likely would have allowed that the Holy Spirit could have continued to rest upon Mary as it does upon certain holy people to our present day. But even then, the concept of Mary's uniqueness would have nagged at me: Nobody, in all of history, has ever had precisely the intimate relationship with the Holy Spirit as did Mary. Surely, I might have thought, there was a possibility that the Holy Spirit, in entering into union Mary, had — as in a real marital union — allowed her to enter into union with itself as well. If such a spiritual union can happen in an earthly sense during humans' conception of children, then one has to admit that it could have happened to a far greater degree during the divine conception of a Child.
If Mary was in fact united with the Holy Spirit as no one before or since, how did that bear fruit in her life apart from the birth of Jesus? We see the answer most plainly in the Magnificat, her song of joy upon visiting Elizabeth. From that, and from Mary's confidence at Cana that Jesus would provide wine, I have an idea of one way in which she was affected by her relationship with the Holy Spirit:
I believe that Mary, more than anyone else who ever lived, had full and complete knowledge of just how much God loved her.
Can you imagine how your life would be if you fully understood how dear you are in the eyes of God?
I believe that if we completely realized the height, depth, and breadth of God's love for us, we would not only have true joy, but we would also love our neighbors as God loves them — because we would know God as we are known, and such knowledge would change us into a reflection of Him.
If Mary did have such knowledge, then, having attained union with God, her only desire would be to bring all of humanity to that same union. If there were such a thing as what Catholics call the Communion of Saints — a connection between souls in heaven and on Earth enabling us to pray for one another — then we could ask Mary to pray for us to join our hearts with her Magnificat, and she would guide us to a deeper understanding of the Father's love.
Today, that is exactly what I believe Mary does — among her other graces.
* * *
Ultimately, I agree with Father C. John McCloskey when he writes in Good News, Bad News: Evangelization, Conversion and the Crisis of Faith that "preeminently, though, belief and devotion regarding Mary represent an area where rational argument will take you just so far." What convinced me of the truth of the Church's doctrines about Mary was the experience I had the first time I ever asked a saint to pray for me (which I described two years ago in "Saints Alive").
The saint was Kolbe, and the way in which my prayers were answered — particularly the supernatural peace I was granted upon asking him to pray for me — convinced me that he was in heaven. From there, I began to read Kolbe's writings on Mary, which upheld many of the doctrines that I had been resisting.
It occurred to me at that point that if Kolbe, having believed what he believed about Mary, were in heaven, then surely belief in such doctrines did not impede one's salvation.
Mary is, at her essence, perfect love, and in that perfect love she is perfect beauty. When one is drawn to that beauty, one sees everything Mary loves in its light — and she loves the body of Christ, His Church.
10:15 PM |
Pick to click
"On a personal note, before I was married I had considered the priesthood. I found it quite telling that the most frequent response people had to that (including Catholics) was 'but you can't have sex!' It was as if they thought I didn't already know that and the Church was hiding it from me. Hey, thanks for the hot tip guys!"
Reading the new book Good News, Bad News: Evangelization, Conversion and the Crisis of Faith, by Father C. John McCloskey (who is famous for bringing a number of high-profile converts into the Church) and Russell Shaw, has made me think back to when I was a Protestant and endured some rather unfortunate arguments from well-meaning Catholics. None of those arguments are in Father McCloskey's book, thankfully. The memory of them reminds me of what Chesterton said about how, when a man is determined to become a Catholic, the only person who can change his mind is a Catholic.
Here then, are the Top Three Worst Arguments to Convince a Protestant that Mary Deserves Veneration, in ascending order:
3. "Mary is perfectly pure, so, if you pray to her, she will purify your prayers and present them to Jesus as her own." This argument is, I believe, theologically sound, according to the Doctors of the Church. However, a Protestant can point to numerous references in Scripture stating that God wants imperfect people to pray and He hears them (as with the publican's praying, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner," or the father in Mark 9 who cries out with tears, "Lord, I believe; help thou my unbelief"). So, from a Protestant perspective, the idea of venerating Mary merely because she provides what is essentially a utilitarian function (and a seemingly nonessential one at that) would not be appealing.
If there is any reason to love the saints, it is because of their goodness and their abiding love for God and us, not because they perform a function for us. We ask them for favors as we would ask favors of our friends. If our love for our friends is real, we would never cite the things they do for us as the reason why we are friends with them. Their actions are an expression of their love and friendship, but their love and friendship cannot be measured by their actions. It is the same with the saints. That is why I believe that even people who do not believe in saints can see through a purely utilitarian argument for them.
2. "You love Jesus, so why not love His mother? Honestly, it takes a lot of energy to love Jesus. His sacrifice for us is beyond comprehension. We need to be reminded of it at every moment of every day, and even then, we can never perceive the half of it. Then we have to imagine how much love He continues to have for us — how His heart burns for us, and how He is touched by all our sorrows. We have to comprehend His presence within us and in our neighbors — which is especially challenging if one does not have the benefit of experiencing it in the Eucharist.
As a Protestant, then, my to-do list on loving Jesus was pretty full without making room for His mother. The "if Jesus, then why not Mary" argument was weak at best, and did not explain the enormous breadth of Catholics' devotion to the Blessed Virgin.
And the Number One Worst Argument to Convince a Protestant that Mary Deserves Veneration:
1. "If you want something from the boss, you ask the boss's mother." As a Protestant, I was given this argument more than once, and one of the Catholics who used it really should have known better; he had a great deal of knowledge and experience as an apologist. I cannot begin to describe how off-putting it was. Here, as with No. 3, is a utilitarian argument, but worse than that; it paints Jesus as a snobby CEO in the sky who plays office politics with our petitions. To a Protestant, needless to say, it goes against every Scripture stating that God hears our prayers.
Coming tomorrow: What convinces Catholic converts that Mary deserves veneration, according to Father McCloskey's book — and what convinced me.
A new film called "In the Wake of Choice" documents the way abortion and the abortion culture has affected not only women, but also men, the friends who helped women get abortions, and women who turned away from an abortion clinic. The trailer is online and well worth watching.
From the New York Times story about preparations at the White House for a white-tie dinner in honor of Queen Elizabeth:
In the West Wing on Friday, the talk was of negotiations with Syria, but in the East Wing, it was all about china — and not the country.
When I see lower-case "china" in a story about a white-tie dinner, followed by the qualification, "and not the country" — in case any readers don't geddit— I have to wonder: Does some editor at the Times think they're writing for radio?
10:33 AM |
Prayer request
A friend who teaches college asks for your prayers for her student, Kimberly. Kimberly, an 18-year-old freshman, revealed to her teacher recently that she had an abortion. Though Kimberly is a pro-life Christian and wanted to keep her baby, she said that financial and parental pressure contributed to her choice — one she regretted instantly. She is deeply depressed and doesn’t know where to turn. Her teacher, who regrets her own abortion, told her own prayer group about Kimberly’s plight, and one of the members generously offered to pay for Kimberly to attend a Rachel’s Vineyard retreat. Please pray that Kimberly’s heart will be moved to accept this offer, according to God's will, and that she will find the peace and healing of Christ.
If you'd like to see an example of something I did during my rock-historian days, the Varese Vintage reissue label has posted online my liner notes for its CD by Lyme & Cybelle, a duo that featured a pre-fame Warren Zevon. My own interest in music doesn't extend to Zevon's solo work (or to very much at all after 1968), but I liked the jangly pop tunes he did with Lyme & Cybelle, and I loved getting to interview Cybelle — now Broadway performer Laura Kenyon — and the great producer Bones Howe.
DEAR ABBY: I am a 28-year-old woman and have been dating a 26-year-old man I'll call "Chris" for four months. We have become good friends. On our last date, the topic of sex came up, and Chris told me that he was a virgin and that it was very important for him to find a girl who had "never been with anyone" either.
Well, Abby, that bridge was burned when I was a teenager. I was honest with Chris about it, which was not easy because I now regret some of the poor choices I made at that time of my life. I am a completely different person now due to a religious conversion and am waiting until I am married to have sex again.
I agree with Abby's advice on what the woman should do, but not with her condescending tone. Can you do better? I think so! Please, be my guest in the comments section below. And pray for "Deflowered in Pennsylvania" and her boyfriend.
GUEST POST: Democratic Candidates Unite Behind Partial Birthday Abortion Act
By Henrietta G. Tavish New York, May 4, 2007 Special to The Dawn Patrol
Seeking to counter the perception that they are weak on "life" issues, the eight declared Democratic candidates for president today proclaimed their support for the "Partial Birthday Abortion Act" — proposed legislation that would ban, in many instances, the termination of an infant before its first full birthday.
The law would protect any baby that had crawled more than halfway out of its "roomb," defined by the Act as "the customary sleeping quarters provided for a potential toddler." Eligible babies need only celebrate a "partial birthday" of a month or more.
"Ungrown children are among the most helpless members of our society," said Sen. Hillary Clinton. "This important measure would ensure that they are not punished for expressing their natural curiosity, while safeguarding the right of the mother to make the decision to raise or not raise a child within the privacy of the bedroomb."
I can't say I like the use of the 9/11 World Trade Center image, though it's always nice to be reminded of the Ground Zero Cross. What's cool about the video to me, other than the cello (there's always room for cello) are Anthony's lyrics, which combine the ten prayers in his book. You can read them on the left-hand side of his book's "Sneak Preview" page. Tune out the images if you have to (though many of them are genuinely heart-tugging), but listen to what's sung and there's something to inspire your own prayers.
The "Yes Prayer"'s music is written by Anthony's brother Carmine; details on recording personnel are on the Ten Prayers site.
"I think that people are questioning the fruit of the sexual revolution. People are seeing that these solutions that were considered panaceas are not proving to make people fulfilled. They're realizing that the idea that feminists have propounded -- that sexual freedom is liberating women -- is a myth. It only frees women from the protections that they had in the past that made happiness possible for them.
"People are becoming more aware that women are not truly empowered by a societal mandate to have sex with whomever they want whenever they want outside of marriage. Women are starting to articulate a kind of philosophy of liberation for women that is not women's lib, but rather, is liberation from the societal pressure that is contrary to their bodies and contrary to their desires.
"I think it's good that people are able to express what's wrong with the culture. But the pleasure principle and various pagan philosophies are always going to be with us. And in our consumer culture, making women lonely is what sells. You don't see a married woman with kids blowing her Christmas bonus in the shoe department at Macy's. Advertisers have a vested interest in keeping women single and lonely, because they're the ones that buy impulse purchases."
My friend Anthony DeStefano, author of A Travel Guide to Heaven, just released his second book, Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To. Although I'm biased, I'm impressed with how Anthony boils down serious, often intense Christian theology with such grace and directness, without losing any meaning or truth along the way.
It's hard for me to describe what Anthony's done with Ten Prayers; the nearest parallel would be the more plainspoken passages in C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity or Fulton J. Sheen's writings. Speaking like a friend with a gift for spiritual direction, he walks the reader through the steps of aligning one's will to God's.
Make no mistake, despite the title, this is no "name it and claim it" book. As with Travel Guide, Anthony's primary interest is for his readers to get to heaven — and that means, as C.S. Lewis intimated in The Great Divorce, that they should receive the grace enabling them to live out what it is like to be in heaven, starting now.
Part of being in heaven is receiving what one wants and needs from God — but to do that in this life, one has to not only ask, but also conform one's will to God's so that one may receive all the blessings God can give. The book's ten prayers are all geared towards enabling the reader to accomplish those goals.
As with Travel Guide, Anthony's writing is so direct that his theology can appear deceptively simple. Read Ten Prayers all the way through, though, and you may find yourself thinking a few hours later, "Wait a minute — didn't he solve the problem of evil?"
At a dinner party last night, I handed a copy of Ten Prayers to the author of a Christian theological work and asked him to read a passage at random. He wasn't familiar with Anthony's writings. Looking at Ten Prayers' cover, he didn't expect anything profound.
It was interesting to watch his expression change as he read aloud the passage upon which his finger landed: "Most people don't realize it, but courage isn't needed only to confront danger — it's much, much bigger than that: Courage is the cornerstone and linchpin of the entire moral order."
The dinner guest paused a moment. "That'll give me something to think about," he said.
Me too.
More thoughts on Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To tomorrow.
"Abstinence education doesn’t work. That was the big hoopla in the American press over the publication of a study by Mathematica, purporting to show that abstinence education programmes don’t work. But with a bit of checking, I found something you are not likely to hear on the evening news. Sex education programmes don’t 'work' either."
— Jennifer Roback Morse, "Does anything work in sex education?", MercatorNet, May 1, lead paragraph (the whole article's well worth reading, by the way)
"The case is closed! 'Abstinence classes don’t work.' newspapers this weekend declared. Not so fast. Had anyone not in Planned Parenthood’s thrall analyzed the report, they would have discovered something far more important: If the data is to be believed, sex education doesn’t work."
Father Rutler reminded parishioners that the career that received the highest happiness rating was that of the clergy. But then he added a fact that I don't recall his mentioning before: The career rated second-highest for happiness was that of firefighter.
That last factoid brought Father Rutler to tell about how he himself had been given an honorary position in a city's fire department (Dallas, if I heard correctly) and had the opportunity to ride for the first time on one of the department's engines.
"I was a priest on a fire truck," he said simply. "I was the happiest man on Earth."
At Joe's Pub last night, where Neil Sedaka was set to perform, I met up with my friend J.R. Taylor — the New York Press reviewer who'd gotten me into the show as his guest — at the bar just before showtime.
J.R. informed me that he'd already seen two interesting things: "one dead mouse and one live Regis Philbin."
The concert was just Sedaka and his piano. I'd never seen him before, and was impressed with how great his voice still sounds at 68. He had a good level of energy, chose mostly his best-known tunes, and clearly loved performing. Hearing songs like "Laughter in the Rain," I was reminded that he is one of the greatest melodists to have emerged from rock's golden era. (Not coincidentally, he's perhaps the only one to have attended Juilliard.)
The operative word is "melodist" — he always used lyricists — but if Sedaka had it his way, none of his audience would have known that. Throughout his performance, he did the "and then I wrote" thing, never mentioning any co-writers. On the contrary, he'd refer to what he called "my lyrics." Especially egregious was when he acted out how he wrote "Love Will Keep Us Together," demonstrating how the lyrics supposedly came to him, and ending the story saying, "That won me a Grammy." As J.R. noted to me, it won him and someone else a Grammy — Sedaka's longtime lyricist, Howard Greenfield, may he rest in peace.
As Sedaka performed the first song of his encore, the slow version of the biggest song of his career, "Breaking Up Is Hard to Do" — co-written with Greenfield — something happened that I have never, ever witnessed at a performance.
He broke a piano string.
I've seen musicians break guitar strings, but never piano strings.
But there it was; you could hear its dissonant twang! as Sedaka couldn't help moving his fingers over the wayward key during the languid ballad.
I like to think it was Greenfield's revenge.
* * *
A nonmusical highlight of the concert was Regis Philbin's star turn — announcing the months during "Calendar Girl."
Regis actually looked nervous onstage. He made it a point to keep the spotlight on Sedaka, telling the audience what a great songwriter he was.
But he really was nervous, so much so that he managed to mess up the months of the year. He was supposed to call them out chronologically, but he forgot to say, "July!"
As Regis returned to his seat after the tune, he had to pass right by where I was sitting on a barstool. Catching me looking at him, he gave a smile. I smiled too, and the next thing I knew was that he grabbed my right hand as he walked by, giving it a squeeze. Very charming. Reeg still has the mojo!
The May/June issue of the Evangelical hipster magazine Relevant devotes three pages to an interview with me about The Thrill of the Chaste (OK, two pages and a full-page photo). The article's not yet online — don't know if it will be — but Relevant's Web site includes a section on where to buy the magazine.
The photo (which, oddly enough, is reversed) is by noted lensman Jordan Hollender, taken in Washington Square Park exactly one week after my boyfriend and I broke up — hence my remarkably dour face and angry red lipstick. Jordan and his assistant actually managed to make me break into laughter at other points in the shoot, but my eyes were still sad, which is probably why the editors went for a more honest photo. I was also terribly underdressed for the chilly March weather, which is why I was rather inadvisably trying to keep my hands warm. (All that said, I secretly think I look pretty.)
There is something you call “the Sex and the City rule.” What is that?
The idea that sex should push the relationship. That’s something that people see in TV shows like "Sex and the City" and magazines like Cosmopolitan. It’s also the idea of “let’s talk about it in bed.” It’s the idea that any intimacy problems can be overcome if, as Dr. Ruth says, “you’re having good sex.” The truth is that if you are not already intimate emotionally, sex is not going to increase the grade, the level, of your intimacy.
The clip brings back some of my earliest memories (as well as the more recent ones of "Groundhog Day"). 
. Although I'm biased, I'm impressed with how Anthony boils down serious, often intense Christian theology with such grace and directness, without losing any meaning or truth along the way.
