So, I haven't posted anything in quite some time. I'll post a few of the articles I wrote for Georgetown University publications to start off with, and try to be more regular after that (just for you multitude of fans!)
First, here is my stirring defense of Sarah Palin. To clarify: I do not like this woman all that much. I hope she doesn't run for President. Nevertheless, just as I always find myself defending President Bush Jr., I found myself having to defend Palin. So here it is, folks:
Note to Feminists: Sarah Palin Is A Woman (And Women Love Her)
Caitlin Barr ‘09
Sarah Palin is not a feminist. Indeed, despite the lipstick and the skirt suits, she is not even a woman. At least this is what many angry feminists would have you believe. In practically the same breath, mainstream feminists accuse the media of sexism directed against Sarah Palin and claim that Palin is not a woman. This is simply baffling.
The National Organization for Women was the first to respond to McCain’s shrewd choice of Palin as his running mate: female voters, according to their press release, “will surely not find Sarah Palin to be an advocate for women.” The shape of feminism’s response to Palin begins to be defined here. Palin may be a female, but she doesn’t speak for women and certainly isn’t a feminist.
This sentiment was echoed in stronger language by Feministing.org’s Jessica Valenti, who spoke at Georgetown University last spring. Jessica wrote on her blog, “even more interesting is that the reporters touting this Palin-as-feminist nonsense are people who pretty much know jack shit about feminism.” With this brief statement, Jessica, a twenty-something young woman who has held brief stints at such illustrious organizations as NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and Ms. Magazine and now devotes her time to running a blog, dismissed out of hand her fellow female journalists working at, among others, the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times. Despite Jessica’s claims to authority, she’s just a little bit out of her league.
But dear old Jessica Valenti wasn’t, for once, the most radical feminist out there. A commenter on her website wrote, “What defines a woman is not what is between her legs, but what is between her ears.” I see. Modern feminism not only knows better than any woman with any conservative leanings what gender she is, but also better than biology.
Sadly, this commenter was not the only woman who denied Palin her womanhood.
Apparently, these days, femininity and traditional values actually make you less of a woman. Wendy Doniger, Professor at University of Chicago’s well-respected Divinity school, wrote for the Washington Post: “[Palin’s] greatest hypocrisy is in the pretense that she is a woman.” Doniger goes on to make a limp, yet resentful argument about how sex is just like religion and how Palin should stop imposing her views on the subjects on everyone else (when liberals like Obama do it, though, its just fine.)
A vicious article on Salon.com opens with the claim that “Sarah Palin may be a lady, but she ain't no woman.” The article goes on to lament Republican misogyny while simultaneously describing Palin as a “Republican blow-up doll,” a “hyperconservative, f***able, Type A, antiabortion, Christian Stepford wife in a 'sexy librarian' costume,” and a “power-mad, backwater beauty-pageant casualty.” But how could this be sexism? After all, Sarah’s not even a woman. The mainstream feminists have truly lost it.
Luckily, the fear that these mainstream feminists’ vitriol is surely based in is warranted. A recent Lifetime Network poll shows that McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate has helped him overwhelmingly amongst women voters. When asked who has a “better understanding of women and what is most important to them,” 44% of women answered McCain/ Palin and 42% answered Obama/Biden. This stands in stark contrast to Lifetime’s July poll, which found only 18% of women responding McCain to the same question. Most women have not lost their minds and can see Palin for what she is: a strong, fearless and impressive woman who stands up for what she believes is best for women and for all Americans and will not sacrifice her values for any contrived notion of who she should be.
I have only a layman’s understanding of feminism; I have never taken a class on it and have read only a little feminist literature. Nevertheless, it has always been my understanding that the movement was intended to allow women to define their own identities and futures outside of external pressures. Instead of advancing women’s freedom to define themselves, mainstream feminism has become just another pressure telling women what they can or cannot do. Instead of being told that we must submit to our husbands, cook, clean, and raise children, young women are now told that we must support liberal economic policies, advocate for abortion and birth control, and even vote against a female candidate in order to properly be considered women. This leaves all women – even career-oriented, intelligent, successful women, who hold traditional or conservative views – in the dust.
So what does make Sarah Palin a woman and even a feminist? The fact that she has five children, a husband, and can walk so well in heels proves that she is indeed, a woman. But Palin is also a feminist, a new, less bitter and more prudent kind of feminist. Sarah is a member of Feminists for Life, a wonderful organization that tackles the abortion issue from a pro-life and uniquely feminist standpoint and has done more than any other group to get young pregnant mothers the help they need, particularly on college campuses. Palin is also living proof of what a feminist can do if she sets her mind to it: namely, rise to a position of great political power without sacrificing family or femininity.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Article for the Georgetown Academy
Keep Your Clothes On! (And Other Helpful Advice)
When you, readers, think about chastity, the word “scary” might not be the first thing you think of, but “scary” is exactly what chastity is. Perhaps images of early Puritans, Victorian nuns with rulers and the more modern (but no less alien) “Purity Balls” spring more readily to mind. Okay, I concede that all of these things are scary, but not in the sense I mean. Perhaps the word “daunting” is more apt. Indeed, the virtue of chastity daunted even the great Saint Augustine who famously said, “Oh Lord, grant me chastity, but do not grant it yet.”
Perhaps it is this fear that also causes anger. Merely hearing the story of Saint Maria Gorretti, a young girl who died to defend her chastity against a would-be rapist, was enough to send many of my classmates in Father McManus’ class on martyrdom into fits of wrath. Father later told me that more essays were written denouncing Saint Maria’s canonization than on any other topic. A swift glance at any feministing.com or feministe.us/blog post about chastity defenders Dawn Eden, Mirriam Grossman or Wendy Shalit confirms the phenomenon.
Rather than mount a litany of arguments in defense of chastity, I will make just one and move on to more practical considerations. My argument may appeal only to Christians – so be it. We are told that “the tree is known by its fruit,” (Matthew 12:33 NIV). In other words, vice produces ill effects and virtue good. Ever since chastity was swept decidedly out of fashion by the tides of “sexual liberation” in the 1960s and 70s (if it was not already a bit out of vogue even earlier), we have watched unplanned pregnancies soar and witnessed an STI epidemic of truly astonishing proportions. As even those who support abortion and contraception acknowledge that these two products of “liberation” cause unprecedented emotional and physical strain for those who suffer from them, I think it is clear that these are bad fruits indeed. I am not – a la John Hagee – suggesting that STIs are God’s punishment for sin, I am merely pointing out that the most evident results of dismissing chastity as an ideal are undue stress and disease.
Nowadays, chastity is becoming less an outmoded ideal and increasingly a practical necessity. Upon discovering she was pregnant a little over a year after testing positive for HPV, one of my most liberal (and “liberated”) friends exclaimed, “I have become that nut job who goes around shaking my finger and saying, ‘It only takes once! Keep your skirt on!’”
And now, as promised, I will move on to more practical questions such as, “What exactly is this terrifying thing that has daunted even Saints and now inspires rage in modern feminists?” Before I attempt to shed light on what chastity might be, I will tell you a few things that it is not.
Chastity is not celibacy, nor Puritanism, nor fear of sex. Rather, it is sex as it is meant to be: sex that is directed toward much more than gratifying our immediate physical desires. As anyone who has kissed both somebody they cared nothing for and somebody they loved will acknowledge, sexual acts (even kissing!) are far more pleasing when physical pleasure is not, in fact, the principal goal. Ironically, when the primary purpose of sex is to physically symbolize love that has already been given, pleasure becomes more complete. How much more must this be true when the gift of love has been given irrevocably in marriage? Sex belongs in marriage because it is the physical symbol of marriage just as a handshake is the physical symbol of greeting and laughter is the physical symbol of joy. Just as faked laughter deceives, sex outside of marriage is, in the words of author Dawn Eden, “lying with your body.” Sex is the most intimate physical gift that can be given, and if it is not given alongside the emotional and practical union of two lives that is found in marriage, it is misplaced and deceptive.
Chastity is also decidedly not maintaining technical “virginity” while engaging in oral and anal sex, as many of today’s “virginity pledgers” apparently think it is. Finally, chastity is not easy. I will be the first to admit (after St. Augustine, of course) that chastity is really, really difficult. So, if chastity is not Puritanism, not promiscuity sans traditional sex and not an easy fix, what is it?
I will answer by way of a few guidelines from which you may choose at your own discretion. Dawn Eden introduced me to my first “chastity rule,” which she had, in turn, learned from a young Jesuit. This Jesuit offered that the line between the chaste and the unchaste is the line between affection and arousal. Intend, he advised, always to display affection and never to arouse.
The next rule I encountered I found in Lauren F. Winner’s book, “Real Sex: The Naked Truth About Chastity.” A minister had once advised her that she do with her boyfriend in private only what she would be willing to do with him in a public space. She referred to a space on her campus called the rotunda. For the Hoya, I suggest Healy Lawn. This rule, of course, presents obvious problems for both the intensely private person and the exhibitionist.
A priest at St. Peter’s Catholic Church on Capitol Hill offered the next two rules to me. The first was, “Keep your clothes on,” (a rule that unfortunately lends itself to abuse by any couple with an ounce of creativity) and the second was, “Don’t touch anything on your boyfriend/girlfriend that you don’t have yourself.”
Perhaps you, reader, will find one of the aforementioned rules amenable. If so, I advise you to quit reading here, for what follows may, even at this Catholic University, shock you. I am about to advise you to have faith in the Lord. As some one who has tried each of these rules and found in every case either the rule or myself sorely lacking, I am forced to recommend a different tactic. This tactic, namely, to put oneself into God’s hands, is scary. Instead of employing a manmade rule that requires our own weak resolve to hold steady in the face of immediate and sometimes overwhelming temptation, I urge you to take a blind and wild leap and leave the matter in the hands of one far more adept than yourself.
Todd Phillips, a preacher at nearby McLean Bible Church, argued in a sermon that to ask for a clearly defined rule is very nearly the opposite of what we should be doing. To seek some line over which we should not cross is to ask how close we can get to fire without being singed. To venture nearer and nearer to sin is to dance with the Devil and in such a dance, as the saying goes, you will not lead. You should, then, run as far in the other direction as you are able, and to do so may require such extraordinary strength that it cannot be found in our own weak bodies. You may find each step away from sin, in this case sexual sin, harder to take than the last, but if you take that first great leap into the care of the Holy Spirit, you will prevail. With each step, I think, you will find that the burden on your conscience and on your heart, which may at present appear to you as nothing more than the nagging fear of an STI or an unexpected pregnancy, will lighten. As with all things, chastity can be achieved not by (human) strength, but by His Spirit (Zech. 4:6).
When you, readers, think about chastity, the word “scary” might not be the first thing you think of, but “scary” is exactly what chastity is. Perhaps images of early Puritans, Victorian nuns with rulers and the more modern (but no less alien) “Purity Balls” spring more readily to mind. Okay, I concede that all of these things are scary, but not in the sense I mean. Perhaps the word “daunting” is more apt. Indeed, the virtue of chastity daunted even the great Saint Augustine who famously said, “Oh Lord, grant me chastity, but do not grant it yet.”
Perhaps it is this fear that also causes anger. Merely hearing the story of Saint Maria Gorretti, a young girl who died to defend her chastity against a would-be rapist, was enough to send many of my classmates in Father McManus’ class on martyrdom into fits of wrath. Father later told me that more essays were written denouncing Saint Maria’s canonization than on any other topic. A swift glance at any feministing.com or feministe.us/blog post about chastity defenders Dawn Eden, Mirriam Grossman or Wendy Shalit confirms the phenomenon.
Rather than mount a litany of arguments in defense of chastity, I will make just one and move on to more practical considerations. My argument may appeal only to Christians – so be it. We are told that “the tree is known by its fruit,” (Matthew 12:33 NIV). In other words, vice produces ill effects and virtue good. Ever since chastity was swept decidedly out of fashion by the tides of “sexual liberation” in the 1960s and 70s (if it was not already a bit out of vogue even earlier), we have watched unplanned pregnancies soar and witnessed an STI epidemic of truly astonishing proportions. As even those who support abortion and contraception acknowledge that these two products of “liberation” cause unprecedented emotional and physical strain for those who suffer from them, I think it is clear that these are bad fruits indeed. I am not – a la John Hagee – suggesting that STIs are God’s punishment for sin, I am merely pointing out that the most evident results of dismissing chastity as an ideal are undue stress and disease.
Nowadays, chastity is becoming less an outmoded ideal and increasingly a practical necessity. Upon discovering she was pregnant a little over a year after testing positive for HPV, one of my most liberal (and “liberated”) friends exclaimed, “I have become that nut job who goes around shaking my finger and saying, ‘It only takes once! Keep your skirt on!’”
And now, as promised, I will move on to more practical questions such as, “What exactly is this terrifying thing that has daunted even Saints and now inspires rage in modern feminists?” Before I attempt to shed light on what chastity might be, I will tell you a few things that it is not.
Chastity is not celibacy, nor Puritanism, nor fear of sex. Rather, it is sex as it is meant to be: sex that is directed toward much more than gratifying our immediate physical desires. As anyone who has kissed both somebody they cared nothing for and somebody they loved will acknowledge, sexual acts (even kissing!) are far more pleasing when physical pleasure is not, in fact, the principal goal. Ironically, when the primary purpose of sex is to physically symbolize love that has already been given, pleasure becomes more complete. How much more must this be true when the gift of love has been given irrevocably in marriage? Sex belongs in marriage because it is the physical symbol of marriage just as a handshake is the physical symbol of greeting and laughter is the physical symbol of joy. Just as faked laughter deceives, sex outside of marriage is, in the words of author Dawn Eden, “lying with your body.” Sex is the most intimate physical gift that can be given, and if it is not given alongside the emotional and practical union of two lives that is found in marriage, it is misplaced and deceptive.
Chastity is also decidedly not maintaining technical “virginity” while engaging in oral and anal sex, as many of today’s “virginity pledgers” apparently think it is. Finally, chastity is not easy. I will be the first to admit (after St. Augustine, of course) that chastity is really, really difficult. So, if chastity is not Puritanism, not promiscuity sans traditional sex and not an easy fix, what is it?
I will answer by way of a few guidelines from which you may choose at your own discretion. Dawn Eden introduced me to my first “chastity rule,” which she had, in turn, learned from a young Jesuit. This Jesuit offered that the line between the chaste and the unchaste is the line between affection and arousal. Intend, he advised, always to display affection and never to arouse.
The next rule I encountered I found in Lauren F. Winner’s book, “Real Sex: The Naked Truth About Chastity.” A minister had once advised her that she do with her boyfriend in private only what she would be willing to do with him in a public space. She referred to a space on her campus called the rotunda. For the Hoya, I suggest Healy Lawn. This rule, of course, presents obvious problems for both the intensely private person and the exhibitionist.
A priest at St. Peter’s Catholic Church on Capitol Hill offered the next two rules to me. The first was, “Keep your clothes on,” (a rule that unfortunately lends itself to abuse by any couple with an ounce of creativity) and the second was, “Don’t touch anything on your boyfriend/girlfriend that you don’t have yourself.”
Perhaps you, reader, will find one of the aforementioned rules amenable. If so, I advise you to quit reading here, for what follows may, even at this Catholic University, shock you. I am about to advise you to have faith in the Lord. As some one who has tried each of these rules and found in every case either the rule or myself sorely lacking, I am forced to recommend a different tactic. This tactic, namely, to put oneself into God’s hands, is scary. Instead of employing a manmade rule that requires our own weak resolve to hold steady in the face of immediate and sometimes overwhelming temptation, I urge you to take a blind and wild leap and leave the matter in the hands of one far more adept than yourself.
Todd Phillips, a preacher at nearby McLean Bible Church, argued in a sermon that to ask for a clearly defined rule is very nearly the opposite of what we should be doing. To seek some line over which we should not cross is to ask how close we can get to fire without being singed. To venture nearer and nearer to sin is to dance with the Devil and in such a dance, as the saying goes, you will not lead. You should, then, run as far in the other direction as you are able, and to do so may require such extraordinary strength that it cannot be found in our own weak bodies. You may find each step away from sin, in this case sexual sin, harder to take than the last, but if you take that first great leap into the care of the Holy Spirit, you will prevail. With each step, I think, you will find that the burden on your conscience and on your heart, which may at present appear to you as nothing more than the nagging fear of an STI or an unexpected pregnancy, will lighten. As with all things, chastity can be achieved not by (human) strength, but by His Spirit (Zech. 4:6).
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
"They've replaced the Body of Christ with a plant!"
A few months ago, I was at Mass with a good friend of mine in Lexington, KY. About halfway through the Mass, my friend turned to me with an incredulous look on his face and says, "Look, they've replaced the Body of Christ with a plant!" Confused, I laughed quietly and resumed singing. "No, no look!" he says, "they replaced the Body of Christ!" Sure enough, as I looked to the still-standing high altar, I saw a large plant awkwardly filling the spot from which the tabernacle had been removed. My feeble mind has, of yet, failed to grasp the purpose behind moving the tabernacle, and therefore Christ Himself, away from the altar and off to the side of the Church (I mean, for goodness' sake, why in the world would we want to look at the place Christ reposes while worshipping!?), and I was left particularly dumbfounded by the replacement of Christ with an ugly fake plant, most likely purchased at the world-famous Catholic goods store we all know as Walmart. I tried to imagine the conversation: "So, we need to move the Tabernacle away from the middle of the altar. People are focusing way too much on Christ; let's move it to the side of the Church." "Wow, what an excellent idea! But what will we use to fill this unsightly space? Perhaps we should use a tree, to show people how we venerate Mother Earth..." Hmmm.
I soon realized that the whole plant fiasco was not unique to this particular Church, but was actually quite a la mode. Another Church, this one in Owingsville, KY, had one-upped the Lexington Church and replaced the whole high altar with trees. "Ha! We'll show them! We won't have any problems with an awkward space on our altar... we'll just demolish the whole thing!" Brilliant. Why celebrate the sacrifice of the Mass at all when you can gaze at faux foliage?
I decided to do some serious research into the origins of this phenomenon. I turned to Wikipedia. When I searched for "high altar plant," I was directed to the article on altars. From this article I learned that the practice of putting plants on altars comes from as far back as the 17th century. I was impressed. Maybe my original skepticism about plants instead of tabernacles and altars was misplaced. After all, neo-druids have been placing plants on their altars for centuries!
Replacing Christ with dusty, potted plants is an excellent idea; it's right up there ordaining females, clapping during the Mass and eschewing the posture of kneeling. Why isn't this practice more widely encouraged?
I soon realized that the whole plant fiasco was not unique to this particular Church, but was actually quite a la mode. Another Church, this one in Owingsville, KY, had one-upped the Lexington Church and replaced the whole high altar with trees. "Ha! We'll show them! We won't have any problems with an awkward space on our altar... we'll just demolish the whole thing!" Brilliant. Why celebrate the sacrifice of the Mass at all when you can gaze at faux foliage?
I decided to do some serious research into the origins of this phenomenon. I turned to Wikipedia. When I searched for "high altar plant," I was directed to the article on altars. From this article I learned that the practice of putting plants on altars comes from as far back as the 17th century. I was impressed. Maybe my original skepticism about plants instead of tabernacles and altars was misplaced. After all, neo-druids have been placing plants on their altars for centuries!
Replacing Christ with dusty, potted plants is an excellent idea; it's right up there ordaining females, clapping during the Mass and eschewing the posture of kneeling. Why isn't this practice more widely encouraged?
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Stop Drop and Roll Won't Work in Hell!
The title is taken from a sign somewhere in Central Appalachia. I did not personally see it, but a friend did.
This post is to thank people for speaking simple truths. I am always amazed when in a everyday conversation (especially one with a stranger), my interlocutor says something that is simply true, but often not mentioned. I think people should do this more, especially me! I have begun to collect these statements. Here are a couple:
I travelled with Sister Kathy to the Glenmary Sisters' motherhouse in Owensboro, KY. Before going into the house, a neighbor came up to greet us. Sister Kathy asked, "how have you been?" The woman replied, "Oh all right, you know. There've been those ups and downs and I've struggled a bit, but you have to remember, Jesus loves you and He is with you every step of the way, don't you think?" Just like that. How many people respond to "how are you?" by recalling that Jesus is always with us? Precious few, I think.
What strikes me about all of these moments is that the person never seems quite sure of him or herself. Often, he or she sounds like he is offering up a highly controversial idea and looking for approval. This humility even in stating basic facts is what really moves me.
Another such moment came on the Fourth of July. As I lay in the grass watching the fireworks, Cody, a seven-year old boy who was in my Bible class, turned to me and said, "Hey Caity? Did you know that you are my sister in Christ?" "Yes, Cody," I replied.
I write about this because I had another similar experience today. The man ringing up my groceries at Whole Foods was telling me about a bag they sold. The bags are sold to support the UN World Food program. He said, "True happiness comes from giving. To receive is nothing, but to give to others is what we are meant for." Wow. Perhaps he was just trying to sell me the bag, but I was nevertheless struck by his candor.
These simple statements cut through quotidian remarks to a deeper level of human conversation. I urge everyone to start saying things like the above more often.
This post is to thank people for speaking simple truths. I am always amazed when in a everyday conversation (especially one with a stranger), my interlocutor says something that is simply true, but often not mentioned. I think people should do this more, especially me! I have begun to collect these statements. Here are a couple:
I travelled with Sister Kathy to the Glenmary Sisters' motherhouse in Owensboro, KY. Before going into the house, a neighbor came up to greet us. Sister Kathy asked, "how have you been?" The woman replied, "Oh all right, you know. There've been those ups and downs and I've struggled a bit, but you have to remember, Jesus loves you and He is with you every step of the way, don't you think?" Just like that. How many people respond to "how are you?" by recalling that Jesus is always with us? Precious few, I think.
What strikes me about all of these moments is that the person never seems quite sure of him or herself. Often, he or she sounds like he is offering up a highly controversial idea and looking for approval. This humility even in stating basic facts is what really moves me.
Another such moment came on the Fourth of July. As I lay in the grass watching the fireworks, Cody, a seven-year old boy who was in my Bible class, turned to me and said, "Hey Caity? Did you know that you are my sister in Christ?" "Yes, Cody," I replied.
I write about this because I had another similar experience today. The man ringing up my groceries at Whole Foods was telling me about a bag they sold. The bags are sold to support the UN World Food program. He said, "True happiness comes from giving. To receive is nothing, but to give to others is what we are meant for." Wow. Perhaps he was just trying to sell me the bag, but I was nevertheless struck by his candor.
These simple statements cut through quotidian remarks to a deeper level of human conversation. I urge everyone to start saying things like the above more often.
Catholic Pick-Up Lines
In the same vein as all of my Catholic nerdisms, here are some pick-up lines I came across on beliefnet.
Top Ten Conservative Catholic Pickup Lines
10. May I offer you a light for that votive candle?
9. Hi there. My buddy and I were wondering if you would settle a dispute we're having. Do you think the word should be pronounced HOMEschooling, or homeSCHOOLing?
8. Sorry, but I couldn't help notice how cute you look in that ankle-length, shapeless, plaid jumper.
7. What's a nice girl like you doing at a First Saturday Rosary Cenacle like this?
6. You don't like the culture of death either? Wow! We have so much in common!
5. Let's get out of here. I know a much cozier little Catholic bookstore downtown.
4. I bet I can guess your confirmation name.
3. You've got stunning scapular-brown eyes.
2. Did you feel what I felt when we reached into the holy water font at the same time?
1. Confess here often?
I also found a couple more elsewhere... enjoy!
May I sit down? I was admiring your Chest-erton. Have you also read Orthodoxy?
I have a vocation to the married life. Can you help me out?
My Guardian Angel thinks you're cute.
My Sacred Heart statue started beating faster when I saw you.
Ah, so you're what happened to my missing rib.
I would like to study the Theology of your body.
Hi. I need somebody to do a Novena with. (Nine dates guaranteed!)
Can I carry your missal for you?
Come to my parish on Sunday. You can see me in a tunicle. *wink*
Top Ten Conservative Catholic Pickup Lines
10. May I offer you a light for that votive candle?
9. Hi there. My buddy and I were wondering if you would settle a dispute we're having. Do you think the word should be pronounced HOMEschooling, or homeSCHOOLing?
8. Sorry, but I couldn't help notice how cute you look in that ankle-length, shapeless, plaid jumper.
7. What's a nice girl like you doing at a First Saturday Rosary Cenacle like this?
6. You don't like the culture of death either? Wow! We have so much in common!
5. Let's get out of here. I know a much cozier little Catholic bookstore downtown.
4. I bet I can guess your confirmation name.
3. You've got stunning scapular-brown eyes.
2. Did you feel what I felt when we reached into the holy water font at the same time?
1. Confess here often?
I also found a couple more elsewhere... enjoy!
May I sit down? I was admiring your Chest-erton. Have you also read Orthodoxy?
I have a vocation to the married life. Can you help me out?
My Guardian Angel thinks you're cute.
My Sacred Heart statue started beating faster when I saw you.
Ah, so you're what happened to my missing rib.
I would like to study the Theology of your body.
Hi. I need somebody to do a Novena with. (Nine dates guaranteed!)
Can I carry your missal for you?
Come to my parish on Sunday. You can see me in a tunicle. *wink*
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
You know you are a Catholic nerd when...
... of the nine books you read during the summer, 7 are written by Catholics, about Catholic things. The other two are written by C.S. Lewis.
... you actually enjoy watching three hour long movies about Saints.
... your best ideas come to you while praying.
... when your team is losing in kickball, you suggest praying to St. Rita (hey, baseball is close enough, right?)
... when you visit the bookstore, the only section you go to is Religion.
... you think that many problems would be solved if people would just read more of Pope Benedict's writings.
... you are spending your summer with nuns. Crazy.
... there are five crucifixes in your room when you aren't there, six when you are (one on your necklace).
... you wear the medals of six saints on a daily basis.
... you actually enjoy watching three hour long movies about Saints.
... your best ideas come to you while praying.
... when your team is losing in kickball, you suggest praying to St. Rita (hey, baseball is close enough, right?)
... when you visit the bookstore, the only section you go to is Religion.
... you think that many problems would be solved if people would just read more of Pope Benedict's writings.
... you are spending your summer with nuns. Crazy.
... there are five crucifixes in your room when you aren't there, six when you are (one on your necklace).
... you wear the medals of six saints on a daily basis.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
You know you are a Catholic nerd when...
... you sleep on the floor for two nights because you are keeping vestments on your bed.
... you affectionately refer to your favorite Pope as "my Benny."
... owning "Spirit of the Liturgy" has become a veritable fad amongst you and your compatriots.
... you consider driving all the way to Baltimore to go to a Solemn High Mass (on the day of your brother's graduation).
... your summer plans include doing yoga while listening to Hildegard von Bingen.
... you and your friend easily spend almost $200 in about 15 minutes at the Catholic bookstore.
... you get invited to Solemn High Masses on facebook.
... you won't put on your seat belt because, "Well, she just received Holy Communion, there is probably no better time to die!"
... your daydreams include the conversations that Saints have in heaven. (Saint Anthony to Saint Cassian of Tangiers: "Hey, this is no fair. Do you know how many Catholics lose things!? All of them, every single one. And do you know how many are stenographers??")
... you have stopped checking the Catechism to answer questions because more often than not when you ask your friends you get the answer not only directly from Catechism, but also from various Church fathers and other prominent theologians.
... you affectionately refer to your favorite Pope as "my Benny."
... owning "Spirit of the Liturgy" has become a veritable fad amongst you and your compatriots.
... you consider driving all the way to Baltimore to go to a Solemn High Mass (on the day of your brother's graduation).
... your summer plans include doing yoga while listening to Hildegard von Bingen.
... you and your friend easily spend almost $200 in about 15 minutes at the Catholic bookstore.
... you get invited to Solemn High Masses on facebook.
... you won't put on your seat belt because, "Well, she just received Holy Communion, there is probably no better time to die!"
... your daydreams include the conversations that Saints have in heaven. (Saint Anthony to Saint Cassian of Tangiers: "Hey, this is no fair. Do you know how many Catholics lose things!? All of them, every single one. And do you know how many are stenographers??")
... you have stopped checking the Catechism to answer questions because more often than not when you ask your friends you get the answer not only directly from Catechism, but also from various Church fathers and other prominent theologians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)