Denver, Colo., Jul 24, 2018 / 04:16 pm (CNA).- This week, CNA says farewell to our summer intern, Lizzy Joslyn. In her final week at CNA this summer, Lizzy offers “The Genius of Woman,” a four-part series of interviews and profiles, based on Pope St. John Paul II’s “Letter to Women,” and interviews with seven Catholic women from very different walks of life. This is the second piece in that series:
John Paul II’s 1995 “Letter to Women” was written to praise and encourage women to embrace the beauty that God gave them – the“feminine genius”- despite social and cultural messages telling them to become something different.
In contemporary society, the pope wrote, “women’s dignity has often been unacknowledged and their prerogatives misrepresented; they have often been relegated to the margins of society and even reduced to servitude. This has prevented women from truly being themselves and it has resulted in a spiritual impoverishment of humanity.”
The pope, on the contrary, encouraged viewing, and valuing, women, from the perspective of their dignity, and the natural complementarity of men and women:“The creation of woman is thus marked from the outset by the principle of help: a help which is not one-sided but mutual. Woman complements man, just as man complements woman: men and women are complementary. Womanhood expresses the “human” as much as manhood does, but in a different and complementary way.”
Rejecting women’s instinct for nurture and self-sacrifice is a part of a modern effort that “overcorrects” gender imbalances and discrimination against women, “by either repressing men and suggesting that men are bad and pushing them down… or on the other hand by trying to treat women as men,” said Michelle La Rosa, managing editor at CNA.
Careers and vocations based in self-giving are often looked down upon by a “feminist” society. Adding a family, or focusing on motherhood, can also be the source of criticism for some women in contemporary society.
But the Church lifts high the call for women to serve, regarding such selflessness with great respect and importance. John Paul II, speaking of Mary, wrote,“For her, ‘to reign’ is to serve! Her service is ‘to reign’!” The same can be said for every woman’s–and person’s–call, he said.
In light of that encouragement, some Catholic women have learned that lesson- “to reign is to serve.”
“Humanity itself owes much of its survival to the fact that women are nurturing,” said Amy Shupe, a teacher at Christian Brothers High School in St. Louis, Missouri.
Their talents in this area does not necessarily restrict them to one vocation. La Rosa and Ginny Kochis, a blogger on Catholic motherhood, both mentioned the life of Saint Zélie Martin–a woman who worked and raised a family with her husband, Louis Martin, who also worked.
“If a woman doesn’t want to work full time, if she wants to be a stay-at-home-mom, if men or women want to prioritize relationships and family above work, it’s almost seen as weakness and women are looked down upon if they can’t have it all,” said YouTuber Lizzie Reezay.
Two women shared their vocation stories with CNA—they are are wildly different, but both expressions of the “feminine genius” that John Paul II celebrated.
Women educating, raising generations to come
Amy Shupe felt a calling to dedicate her life to teaching a subject she never found easy. Her early years in school, she said, involved a lot of standardized test-taking. Seeing her poor results on such tests–particularly in math–discouraged her.
Her teachers’ reactions didn’t exactly uplift her, either.
“They didn’t point-blank,” tell her she couldn’t achieve higher scores in math, she said, but teachers would place a lot of weight on their students’ scores. “You kind of get the feeling that… it’s gonna be a real struggle for you, so maybe you should think about something else,” Shupe said.
In high school, though, she began to receive greater encouragement from her teachers. That’s when she discovered that she wanted to be that same source of encouragement for students who felt like they couldn’t do math.
“I have to help other people not feel the same way that I felt,” she said.
Now, Shupe is a high school teacher at Christian Brothers High School in St. Louis, Missouri. A 2017 recipient of a prestigious teacher’s award, the Distinguished Lasallian Educator Award, she invests copious amounts of her time and energy to the growth of her students.
“I work very hard at my job. I’m constantly thinking about it,” she said.
The role of a teacher can most certainly be taken on by men or women, but there’s something to be said for the emotionally intuitive side of women that lends itself to working with children, she said.
A mother of two children, Shupe exercises similar skills at work and at home.
“My number one role…is mom,” she said. “First, I’m a mother. I have two kids and I take care of them. And so then I think it easily translates into my classroom. You know, while those boys are not my flesh and blood, but I do know that… they have parents that are looking out for them,” said Shupe. Granted the trust of her students’ parents, she said, they are “put in my care day after day after day and I’m not there just to help them with math. I’m there to help them… learn about life… and have good influence on others.”
A Bride of Christ
A nun.
What the world sees: a humble, quiet, unsuspecting woman. Not exactly the “ideal” successful, commanding businesswoman. Mental pictures of “The Sound of Music” abound.
What Christ sees: His bride.
Sister Maria of the Capuchin Poor Clares in Denver, Colorado grew up in a strong Catholic household, but she never thought she would commit to the consecrated life.
In her younger years, Sister Maria was never a very committed practicer of the faith, she said. She attended Mass and received the Sacraments not “out of my own conviction,” she said, but more “of out of duty” to follow along with her family.
Things began to change one summer when she attended a retreat–one priest’s homily on God’s love “struck” her.
“This priest, I remember very, very clearly… he was talking about the love of God and he said, you know, ‘God loves us all the time, every moment. If he would just stop to love this one moment, we would just stop existing!”
Astounded by the gravity of this statement, Sister Maria began her search for ways to serve the God whose love, she had found, allowed her very existence. The next summer, she went on a mission to a poverty-ridden mountain town in Mexico.
There, she said, she found the poorest–yet, the richest–people.
“They were so pure and simple and giving and generous and they treated us like we were angels from God… they offered everything they had, they took us into their homes,” she remembered. “This pure life!”
Inspired after the mission, Sister Maria began to frequent a monastery near her home. The sisters, she observed, had a strangely similar poor-yet-rich complex. It took her months to admit it to herself, but Maria finally decided to discern her calling to be a nun.
A strong woman, says the world, is independent. But what if there is strength in dependence–on God?
John Paul II, in expressing his thanks for consecrated women, wrote, “Following the example of the greatest of women, the Mother of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word, you open yourselves with obedience and fidelity to the gift of God’s love. You help the Church and all mankind to experience a ‘spousal’ relationship to God, one which magnificently expresses the fellowship which God wishes to establish with his creatures.”
This specific and crucial mission, to “help the Church and all mankind to experience a ‘spousal’ relationship to God” is one only women can fulfill. And, because of the world’s disdain for obedience and quietness, this noble mission is also often looked down upon.
Although Sister Maria lives behind closed doors, she lives pray for people outside those doors. “We are here for the world, for the sake of others,” she said.
To some women, a life like Sr. Clare’s might seem to impossible- too simple, too humble, not empowered.
Consecrated life, like motherhood, is sometimes regarded as less significant work than traditional employment.
“People are so afraid of permanent commitment,” said Sister Maria, adding that she has seen fewer and fewer vocations to the Poor Clares.
A strong woman, says society, is a woman who isn’t afraid to invest in herself and do what she pleases.
But a strong woman of faith, says God, is a woman who isn’t afraid to fully commit herself to Christ.
Not only do “feminists” disregard the gravity of such commitment, but they also constantly reach for ways to prove that they are not “different than men, instead of trying to compete or equal in their own way,” the nun said.
Even when it comes to roles in the Church.
“Some groups continue to demand priesthood for women,” she said, but this “doesn’t make much sense.”
Considering Mary, she said, there are many opportunities for women to have a strong influence on the church.
Mary “never claimed to be one of the apostles…. She had her own role, and continues to have it in the church,” she said. “Who can be more important… her role in salvation history… than Mary’s?”
Disclaiming that she did not encourage priesthood for women, she added, “In a way, Mary was a priest. She was the first one who carried Jesus… The body of Christ is Mary’s body. The Eucharistic Body, in a way, is Mary’s flesh.”
“Every Communion, you carry Jesus,” she said, and, quoting St. Francis, “You give birth to Jesus through your good works.”
Sister Maria referenced St. Clare’s teachings: “We can carry Jesus the same way that Mary carried him… Mary carried Jesus in her womb for nine months, but the faithful soul can carry him spiritually, always.”
Women, she said, should embrace the roles in the church that God has offered to them rather than scrambling for more roles. If man and woman were the same, she said, it wouldn’t be as beautiful.
Ultimately, each woman–and man, for that matter–is called to be vigilant of God’s wish for their life, said Sister Maria.
“It’s a journey that never ends. You will always be receiving the vocation from God every day and answering to a vocation every day,” she said. “Do not be afraid to give yourself to Christ.”
[…]
This is a man whose office is to defend and uphold the perennial teachings of the Catholic faith? I am ashamed for my Church.
“I certainly would not write [that] now,”
Well, we’re certainly relieved about that. 🙄
Víctor Manuel Fernández and Jeffrey Epstein walk into a bar … Seriously, there is nothing funny about this story. How can this man remain in such an important role? Perhaps someone can find a compromising photo of him celebrating a Latin Mass.
Maybe Rupnik took his cues from this “literature”?
Possibly. Rupnik and Tucho both embrace a “porno-mysticism” like that of the Dominican brothers Thomas and Marie-Dominique Philippe and their disciples like Jean Vanier. So too McCarrick, Zanchetta, and countless other predators associated with this pontificate.
Amoralist Laetitia is based on this evil philosophy, that sin can sometimes be God’s will, supporting all manner of pastoral heresies – like tolerating concubinage or “blessing” couples in an irregular relationship, etc. The reality of this pontificate is coming into focus.
“Hypocrisy is not protected under the mantle of religion.”
Bernanos, The Impostor 💋
http://www.dailycatholic.org/cumexapo.htm
One is left to wonder how, why, such a ruling from the Holy See is not appealed to in the present situation. Thank you for citing it.
Another appointee of the Pontiff Francis revealed as being psycho-sexually obsessed, joining the line-up of McCarrick, Grassi, Zanchetta, Hollerich, etc, etc, etc.
These are what Jesus called the “false shepherds.” Thieves…stealing from Christ himself.
At this point it has become terribly sad. Of all the theologians in the world, this is the man Francis wanted at his side, authoring his documents. It will be interesting watching how they try to wiggle through this. But it probably necessarily lays bare and ties together some other actions and aspects of the current Church, Rupnik, after all, can be seen as only putting into action some of this, and, of course, sodomy must not be so bad after all in this light, only men seeking ecstasy. That this book comes to light before us now perhaps is an act not just permitted but willed by heaven. It exposes the roots of thought that must have become widespread over the past century, influencing among other things the widespread homosexuality in the clergy, and the minimizing of the importance of sexual sin in general. At root perhaps is confusing the analogy of spiritual ecstasy experienced by Teresa and others with the most fleshly of bodily experience. What is true by analogy is false and misleading by equivalence. One would think such smart people would know that.
They are not smart. They are cunning and clever and arrogant, but not intellectually gifted. They care nothing for the splendor of truth, which seizes and enlightens the intellects of those who recognize it.
We read: “He also defended that book [!], saying at the time that it was ‘a pastor’s catechesis for teens’ and “not a theology book.”
A very curious remark, even clericalist….Meaning, perhaps, that “at the time” he exempted himself from the requirement (protecting the Church) that he secure an imprimatur and imprimi potest? Or, perhaps, that things “pastoral” are beyond good and evil and are exempt from any higher permission? Or, both? No longer a problem since Fernandez, as Prefect of the DDC, now is in a position to unilaterally invent new clericalist categories and issue permission to himself, both!
As in mythical times—“full blown from the head of Zeus! Fiducia Supplicans! The new Christmas Story! No longer for “teens” only (say what?), but now anybody two-by-two as were welcomed in Noah’s Ark! Very biblical!
Confusion and scandal? What confusion and scandal? Not longer Vincent of Lenins and Cardinal John Henry Newman (“The Development of Christian Doctrine”), butt Alfred E. Newman: “What, me worry?”
A pastoral book for teens BUT NOT a theology book! To do something like that is a equal to grooming vulnerable kids and for many that goes with jail time for a long time! So are we looking at uncle ted 2? What next? Heal me with your mouth 3: prison diaries? These last twelve years I’m sick to death of the whole lot of these south American cowboys!!! Come back JPII and Benedict All is forgiven!
Has the debate over whether a council can remove a pope been settled?
What would stop a future pontificate from declaring this one annulled?
To Harry,
A Council is not superior to the papacy and cannot remove a pope. However, if a pope actually preaches heresy, then (we read) he automatically ceases to be pope. https://onepeterfive.com/cardinal-burke-a-pope-who-professes-formal-heresy-would-cease-to-be-pope/
Which explains why moral novelties are only insinuated,implied or enabled, and this by functionaries other than the pope himself. And, floated as pastoral exemptions from the universal moral law, rather than as direct contradictions (thusly, the moral law remains intact on paper and is even reaffirmed, while practice is quarantined to go off on its own).
We end up with parallel universes rather than formal heresy. This is the strategy…the non-penitent makes “decisions” within some allegedly validating context or another (now a finely-drawn “blessing”?), rather than moral “judgments.” And this is why Veritatis Splendor is treated with evasive silence rather than attacked.
St. John Paul II saw all of this coming when he wrote explicitly into the Magisterium, such as this:
“A separation, or even an opposition [!], is thus established in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid and general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final DECISION [no longer a ‘moral JUDGMENT’!] about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral’ solutions [!] contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept [‘Thou shalt not….’]” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 56, caps added).
The citation above from N.D. is not to be ignored.
Life choices have consequences. Time for some thoughtless ecclesiastics to adopt the notion of personal responsibility and absent themselves.
Card Fernández’s book includes a lengthy description of [a 16 yearold girl] kissing and caressing his [Christ’s] body from head to toe as the Blessed Mother stands by and approvingly allows the encounter to take place. This is homoeroticism, virtually identical with the nouveau theology of Fr Rupnik, suggesting a similar role of himself, Rupnik, as Christ within a trinity of fornicators himself and two consecrated sisters he seduced.
San Egidio, a spiritual community calling itself the Rainbow Community has had Card Matteo Zuppi, head of the Italian Episcopal Conference, an LGBT advocate as a prominent member. The community draws youth worldwide engaging in charity for the poor nevertheless presenting a homosexual friendly spirituality. Apparently the intention is to intertwine legitimate spiritual effort with homosexuality. A theology that would find Rupnik’s behavior admissible and explain Pope Francis’ primary focus on the poor. Homosexualization of the Church, as the trajectory of appointments and causes seem is in contradistinction to Christ.
Fr. Peter,
You wrote:
“Card Fernández’s book includes a lengthy description of [a 16 yearold girl] kissing and caressing his [Christ’s] body from head to toe as the Blessed Mother stands by and approvingly allows the encounter to take place,”
Of all the qualified prelates on the planet to choose from to head up the CDF (now DDF), how do you suppose Bergoglio ends up picking someone who has published blasphemous pornography?
Just wondering if you had any thoughts on that.
Thanks
Unfortunately Harry because His Holiness is of like mind. Pope Francis possesses suggestive art, one a naked Christ carrying a naked Judas over his shoulder. A homoerotic caricature that reveals his predilections. Apparently a gift from Archbishop Paglia himself known for homoerotic frescoes who Francis appointed as President of the Pontifical Academy for Life and Grand Chancellor of the John Paul II Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family. Francis is by all indication attempting to homosexualize the Church.
Harry. Francis’ artifact of a naked Christ carrying a naked Judas over his shoulder as indicated is albeit homoerotic, although it suggests further regarding sin. Judas the betrayer is envisioned as forgiven, a lost sheep who was found. Intellectual homosexuality has at its basis a diminution of all sin in response to their own sinful behavior, that Our Lord is inclined to forgive them. Both figures naked to inculcate homosexual forgiveness in Christ’s saving act.
Thank you for your frank reply. I agree.
So how are we to know in 10 years Tucho won’t say of “Fiducia” “I certainly wouldn’t write that now.” There is a saying — litera scripta manet (the written word remains) — which might be appreciated by the current Curia if it were not on a warpath with Latin. And if we are not to judge THIS work by Tucho or THAT work by Tucho, the question becomes: other than sycophancy, what qualifies him to be DDF Prefect?
Yes, John. The way that Tucho and fellow travelers act and promote their modernistic/liberal ideas, I suspect that if he wrote the book today, he wouldn’t change very much, if anything. Instead, he would loudly, proudly, and repeatedly proclaim that what he has written does not mean what it appears to mean to all those who find fault with it, and that the book is in fact a work of profound spirituality. He would also employ a cadre of pretentious lickspittles to defend his work while accusing all critics of bad faith and/or a lack of understanding needed to appreciate the depth of his statements that provide “deeper and wider orthodoxy” than ever before.
Tucho and his apologists don’t just put lipstick on a pig. They add more make-up to it, dress it up with human clothing, and proclaim it to be the next stage in human evolution.
“That’s why I don’t think it’s a good thing to spread it now,” Fernández said. “In fact, I have not authorized it and it is contrary to my will.”
So the issue isn’t that he wrote a raunchy book, it’s that someone found it after he tried to hide it. Got it.
Can anyone imagine any of his predecessors acting this way?
That he would not write it now is because he was found out!!!!!! Priests are lacizied for lesser things, he has to go!!! The lib theological rubbish has shown it’s bad fruit and it’s hateful to the soul!
Jeff Mirus, Catholic Culture, Jan. 9
‘ I certianly would not write that now ‘ – thus, bringing joy to heaven of a repentant heart, helping others too to recognize the rightful boundaries between carnality and spiritual realms, esp. if there has been some confusion in same, in efforts to be over enthuastic, even about some of TOB teachings to an extent…
The Cardnl too might have fallen into similar error at the time, thus in compassion wanted to bring ‘ comfort’ to those he might have thought were feeling deprived and now recognising his error to also have come up with better choices ; not familiar with his writings , thus unsure as to what same might be , yet hope that it would be in line with The Passion meditations,such as of offering up of the Holy Face merits on behalf of all, including generations , to help free persons from carnal spirits , to be led to the joy of the holy marriage and the Immaculate conception of parents of bl.Mother …
Those who brought attention to the book now, even if had intended something similar to the act of Canan ? stealing the mystical animal skin garment , mocking the nakedness of Noah … may same bring attention to some similar areas even in The Church as a whole – such as the scene of creation of Adam at the Vatican ; hope those words – ‘ I would not have done that now ‘, be applicable to same too , since Adam was clothed in Light , was not ‘naked ‘ or any images of such nakedness of The Lord anywhere, including in Nativity scene – as though His parents were uncaring enough to leave Him without even a blanket ; good light technology could help in such situations ..
The Holy Face merits to be offered up for many many ..
May this be an occasion for same including for those persons who need same, to live in holy relationships !
Does anyone still doubt we have a very serious homosexual problem among highly ranked people of Francis’s pontificate?
Time to have this man’s head examined
“The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.” (John 10:10)
Fernandez and Bergoglio are working for the thief.
By Canon Law, if The Ministerial Office Of The Papacy is vacant, you must Call a Council to elect a Pope.
A Cardinal who professes formal heresy ceases to be a Cardinal, having ipso facto separated himself from The One Body Of Christ.
http://www.dailycatholic.org/cumexapo.htm
“Canon 188 §4 states that among the actions which automatically (ipso facto) cause any cleric to lose his office, even without any declaration on the part of a superior, is that of “defect[ing] publicly from the Catholic faith”.
McCarrick, Rupnik, Zanchetta, Fernandez – Why do characters like this keep cropping up at the Vatican, and protected by the Pope? What is going on in the Vatican? Have we no bishops or cardinals who will ask this question?
Cardinal Sarah Finally Speaks Out – Mark Lambert, Catholic Herald, Jan. 9.
I read someone say that Fernandez “shares a certain opennes to different ways of seeing things” and that is a total and most direct recipe for a bigger disaster in the Church than we already have. We don’t see in “new ways”, we seek to see through Jesus-God’s eyes of Truth ONLY, which is what True Saints did for 2,000 years and do now. The True Catholicism of the True Jesus is never sentimental or emotional as that kills true love and opens wide doors to “mystical” evil. It is precisely that “certain openness to seeing things in different ways” that the German Bishops have and are pushing ever harder for and that is brazenly and totally Anti-Catholic.
Francis will continue his “openness” to below-the-belt-sins approach. You only use over-delicate, over-mothering approaches of “openness” in order to “correct” only when you want that something you “correct” to grow and totally take over. I believe that Francis and Fernandez orchestrated the finding and release of this latest horrible book for its shock-and-discouragement-just-surrender-to-it value. We must be “closed” inside Jesus Sacred Heart of Truth and never “open” to evil. Always remember, Heaven does have walls, it is not “open” (Apocalypse/Revelation 21:12).
Alfred Hitchcock’s 1953 film “I, Confess” was banned in Ireland – but not the United States – because it had a priest who presumably had committed mortal sins against the Sixth Commandment with a woman BEFORE becoming a priest.
Judging by at least one of his very famous films, to my knowledge Alfred Hitchcock was not a good person.
I haven’t been impressed with the rigor of the rating by the Legion of Decency. It – treacherously? – appears to have let through stealth immorality. Any film which accepted divorce should have gotten a C and not a B. For that matter, the dress allowed was immodest.
It’s been many years since I watched “I, Confess,” but I’m fairly certain that Logan never had any relations with Ruth. For what it’s worth.
I don’t remember that being a part of the plot either.
What a great film that was. It’s my very favorite Hitchcock movie.
Did not Judas betray Jesus…with a kiss…
one duly but sorrowfully noted by Jesus Christ.
I can barely read headlines about these scandalous writings, let alone their context, regardless of their aging.
Hopefully, everyone can now refocus to St. Pope John Paul II’s wonderful writings on the theology of the body.