Women and God…

« Tertullian On Marriage

The New York City Council and Choice »

Women and God…

November 18, 2010 by Gerard M. Nadal

More pickings from my FB friends on women, men, and God…

‎”A woman’s heart should be so hidden in Christ that a man should have to seek Him first to find her.”

~Max Lucado

H/T Diane B Mendys Khan

Posted in Dignity | 38 Comments

38 Responses

on November 18, 2010 at 8:35 AM Mary Catherine

this is a truly wonderful quote.

However, if you will notice on Sundays, our Catholic churches are devoid of men unless they are married or elderly.

There are however, plenty of single women.

I think many single women are wondering just how to touch the hearts of the many men who do not have any room at all for Christ in their lives? Not even for an hour on Sunday.

You can see plenty of single men running, cycling and working out at the gym on Sunday mornings.

Because the cult of the body is SO important to these men, it is not surprising that a sexual relationship is paramount to them in a relationship.

A woman in a relationship with Christ is often just written off. The secular man has no problem these days finding women who think similarly.

So the challenge is what to do about this?

I think that married men like Dr. Nadal should actively consider reaching out to young Catholic men in some sort of ministry. You married men have the life experience to tell these men that the message our culture is giving is not going to make them happy. The hook-up culture in no way compares to happiness, satisfaction and stability that a good marriage provides.

If something isn’t done there are going to be many beautiful Catholic women who will never find a husband. As the mother of THREE lovely, talented and CATHOLIC daughters I wonder where their husbands will come from. There are few boys their age who attend church on Sundays. 😦
on November 18, 2010 at 9:03 AM Gerard M. Nadal

I do reach out MC.

I often tell these guys that the girl you take away for the weekend isn’t necessarily the one who’ll go the distance with you in life, and that married sex is to fornication what prime rib is to hamburger.

There’s much more frank discussion that takes place, but I’m limited by my own rules of decorum here 😉
on November 18, 2010 at 2:58 PM Mary Catherine

well it’s also the fact that THE woman they take home for the night/weekend is somebody’s daughter and will some day hopefully be somebody’s wife.

Still it doesn’t seem to matter to men and sometimes I’m thinking even less to women who behave like this. I believe many women feel they have no choice if they want to have a boyfriend or keep the relationship. And that’s the tragic part. I place the blame largely on contraception. If the contraceptive mentality weren’t prevalent, women would be seen as “available” to be used by men, women wouldn’t be allowing themselves to be used by men since the consequences might be rather unpleasant if they do and women would feel they had more of a choice in the matter.

BTW I wasn’t implying that you personally somehow weren’t doing your duty or were lacking therein. I just meant that good Catholic men need to mentor their younger brothers and there needs to be alot more of this on a parish and diocesan level.
on November 18, 2010 at 5:49 PM L.

“I believe many women feel they have no choice if they want to have a boyfriend or keep the relationship.”

You seem to think that young women only reluctantly engage in premarital sex, as a means of seeking emotional fulfillment, but in reality, I think young women engage in it for the same reasons men do.
on November 18, 2010 at 8:28 PM Mary Catherine

L, I think there are many women who do become sexually involved because they are pressured by their boyfriends.
This is definitely the case in many young women under the age of 20.
There is enormous pressure on young teen women to “go all the way” by boys.
I personally know of young women who have been dumped by these guys because they won’t do what the boys want.
This is devastating to the woman and she eventually learns that if she doesn’t comply, she loses the guy. Happens all the time.
One young girl who faced this situation was 14 years old and a friend of one of my daughters. Her boyfriend spent about 8 long months attempting to get this girl to do what he wanted. He finally dumped her.

Very sad.

This is one of the main reasons why none of my girls have dated and won’t be dating until they are ready for marriage. This is a sort of emotional prostitution and emotional blackmail on the part of very immature men who are only in this for their own needs.

Of course, there are plenty of women who seek out sex too.
Those women are lost souls who have little understanding of their feminine nature. I feel sorry for them.
on November 18, 2010 at 8:37 PM L.

Mary Catherine, I don’t doubt that this happens all the time, but I am inclined to believe the women are also sexual beings, with urges comparable to those of men. We are merely socialized differently — no one says, “boys will be boys!” when it’s girls instead.

Woman who seek out sex as a means of securing emotional attachments, or who only participate because they don’t have the self-worth to believe that men would want them for anything else — I agree this is sad.

But some women do have very strong sexual urges, and this doesn’t have anything to do with “feminine nature” or lack of understanding of it — whether they choose to act on their urges NOT.

And many don’t act on it, since one need not be religious to choose to refrain from irresponsible sexual activity and wait for the right partner.

A “feminine nature” and an insatiable desire for sex are not mutually exclusive!
on November 18, 2010 at 8:44 PM Mary Catherine

my point L, is that MANY young women today are pressured into a sexual relationship when they are not physically and emotionally ready.

These girls know this but because our society is couple-oriented and because of contraception and the fact that technically virtually EVERY woman is now theoretically able to comply without worry of pregnancy, it has shifted the balance of power in the relationship.
Before, men knew there were pressures and reasons NOT to engage in this kind of behaviour outside of marriage. It could lead to them being trapped into a marriage. They also knew the majority of women would not comply.

No such chance today. There is no reason for the woman not to comply. Sex does not always mean a baby anymore. And if a baby is conceived well there’s always back-up birth control in the form of abortion.

Where once a woman without “virtue” was a ruined woman, today a woman with “virture” is a ruined woman.
on November 18, 2010 at 8:55 PM L.

Hmm, I have to disagree that today a woman with “virtue” is a ruined woman. I assume you mean the sexual definition of virtue here. I know many young women who aren’t even religious but choose to wait just because they realize that it’s a bad idea to randomly exchange bodily fluids with people with whom they are not committed.

I also don’t think contraception has shifted the balance of power to the men (if anything, it gave women like me MORE power, to freely act according to our own urges, with greatly reduced fear of pregnancy). Women — and men — who want to abstain from sex for any reason are just as free to do so.

In the “good old days,” lots of men still found a way to get what they wanted from women who were willing to provide it, and plenty of men walked away afterward. There were scoundrels, there were deadbeat dads, long before contraception was legal.

I agree that many young people — both men and women — today are pressured into a sexual relationship when they are not physically and emotionally ready, and I agree this is regrettable.
on November 18, 2010 at 9:59 PM Mary Catherine

L you are plainly out of touch.

A chaste woman has a very very hard time in today’s world.

That was not the case 50 or 60 years ago. It was the promiscuous woman who had the hard time.

And yes many men did find a way around things to get what they wanted, but it is VERY VERY much more a man’s world today.

Women who wish to remain chaste before marriage, who wish to be courted rather than hook-up, and women who would like a decent man and a large family do not feel liberated by feminism. We feel betrayed.
on November 18, 2010 at 10:07 PM L.

I don’t think I’m out of touch — I have many friends and co-workers in their 20’s and 30’s. I also have teenagers of my own, and know plenty of their friends. Many young people are in no hurry to embark on any sexual relationships. These include religious as well as many non-religious young people.

I totally disagree that it’s “VERY VERY much more a man’s world today.” Women are empowered economically to support themselves, and don’t need to depend on anyone to support them anymore. They can leave abusive relationships — and they do. They are freer to avoid them in the first place.

I didn’t think feminism was all about “hook-ups.” I think it’s about getting paid the same as a man for the same work, and having the same opportunities based on ability, regardless of gender.

An empowered woman, with her own education and means of support, is in a better position to say NO to anything she doesn’t want.
on November 19, 2010 at 7:25 AM Jessi (ycw)

I don’t think young women are a monolithic group at all. I think some probably desire sex for the same reason men do. I think some are probably pressured into it when they don’t want it. In general, research seems to show that men have a stronger sex drive than women. But and individual woman might well have a stronger sex drive than an individual man. Undoubtedly our sex drives work differently: men are more aroused visually, women sensually and emotionally. Abstinence is (in my belief) probably harder on men than on women–due to the physiological processes involved, they tend to want sex more as a period of abstinence progresses, while for women desire tends to decrease if it is not fulfilled for a period. Women do not endure the same sort of physical need for release which men do. But women do have a deep need for emotional connection, so it is much easier for a man to use his affections to gain what he wants from a woman, withholding them until (in this case) she puts out. Women, on the other hand, sometimes do the opposite, withholding sex until the man does something or agrees to something she considers important.

Outside of marriage, for a man to pressure a woman by withholding emotional intimacy until she has sex with him is clearly sinful, while for the woman to refuse sex until her desired goal–marriage–is righteous. So in that case, this exchange works out to paint the woman as a righteous defender of virtue and the man as a cad. However, if it’s not marriage she’s holding out for, it’s just a power struggle.

Within marriage, either form of manipulation is sinful. It is reprehensible for either a husband or a wife to refuse to be emotionally or physically available to their spouse without good reason, and doubly so for it to be in pursuit of some lesser goal. Emotional and physical intimacy are integral parts of marriage, and for one or the other to be conditional cheapens marriage. So while before marriage, it appears that in the “traditional” case the man refusing to express love without sex is a cad, while the woman refusing to put out without a ring is a paragon of virtue, were either to continue this pattern into marriage it is sin and not God’s plan for marriage. If the same man refuses to talk with his wife unless she’s cleaned the house, he’s still a cad; if the same woman refuses him sex until he helps her clean the house, she is no better. Both defraud each other.

And in reality, the woman who gives sex in exchange for emotional intimacy follows the same pattern as the one who withholds it until she gets a ring–though one seems righteous because her goal is more noble. But in reality, it is as folly to marry the man who marries for sex as the one who will only say “I love you” in exchange for sex. Neither man acts from a pure heart, though the actions of the man who marries seem righteous–thus the appearance that the woman who insists on waiting for marriage guards moral virtue. Neither woman properly uses her sexuality if it is simply bait or a reward for the correct behavior.

A Christian woman should be seeking a man after God’s heart, not a man who will wait until marriage to bed her–though that willingness to wait is part of being a Godly and righteous man. She should guard her body and her heart from a handsome face or smooth words. Her body should be a gift saved for the one God intends it for, not a reward for good behavior or a bargaining chip.
A Christian man should not be seeking the way to have sex, or choosing a woman based solely on who he might like to have sex with. He also should seek the Godly woman who will be his partner in all things, grow in Christ with him, and be faithful to the same God as he.
And these two Christians should not be seeking to bend each other to their will, but both seeking after God’s Will. They should not be jumping through hoops to gain a chance at the other’s body, but guard each other’s purity as well as their own, helping each other to flee temptation and being strength when the other is weak, choosing together to save themselves until their marriage can be consummated without guilt or shame.
on November 19, 2010 at 5:24 PM Mary Catherine

L I am talking about relationships, not economics.

And these two Christians should not be seeking to bend each other to their will, but both seeking after God’s Will.

I quite agree Jessi. However, (speaking as a Catholic) a woman on birth control is already on the wrong side of the street. When not in God’s grace, it’s much harder to discern just what God wants of us.
I am speaking here about the demographic group I am most familiar with – young Catholic women who are faithful to the church. These women are having a very hard time finding spouses.
Just try being a young Catholic man not willing to fornicate. Very tough indeed.

I don’t think ANYONE over the age of 35 has a clue as to the enormous peer pressure young people face today regarding becoming sexually active. In some cases, it is a choice between having friends and having absolutely NONE at all and being a social pariah. Not many young people have the maturity to withstand this kind of pressure.
on November 19, 2010 at 5:39 PM L.

Mary Catherine, I believe you were talking about feminism, which is about both.

“In some cases, it is a choice between having friends and having absolutely NONE at all and being a social pariah.” –>

That sounds like a really poisonous kind of atmosphere, and I feel truly sorry for any young person who has to face it. In fact, it is actually the reverse of what used to happen (e.g., a girl would act on her sexual urges and then be shunned by all as a “slut”).

Such exclusion, for either reason, is regrettable, and it’s up to us as the parents of teens to teach our kids to be more accepting of their peers, even those with different values.
on November 19, 2010 at 8:09 PM Jessi (ycw)

I am not a Catholic, but you may trust that I have no more love for birth control than you. And I am 27–my children are as yet a long way from teens, though I read enough to have some idea of the challenges ahead of me.

For me it was a bit the other way around–I was a social pariah and thus did not have the opportunity to have sex. And for this I am now very grateful, because I was a virgin when I got married–God saw fit to guard my purity though I did not, and used my experiences to teach me that there are worse things than being the only one to think or believe a certain way; I know social ostracism enough that it holds no fear for me, and I am a stronger person for that.

While I don’t think a young woman should be completely shunned for her decisions, I do think there is merit in following those doing right and making wise choices. So while (once they are older) I would not want my children to ostracize or make fun of another child, I also would not want them to look up to someone who was having a lot of sex as a role model, or be spending more time with such a person than with kids making better choices. And if someone were bragging about their sexual adventures, there might be no way to avoid hearing about it other than avoiding them. So I would expect a Christian young person to not spend as much time with someone who was sleeping around, especially if they were vocal about it and proud of it. Such a person should be respected as a human being, but at the same time a Christian should not endorse their poor choices. So whether I would condemn “slut-shaming” depends on exactly what you mean by that, L.

Kids always seem to find someone to pick on, and no matter who it is and why that person is targeted, it is not okay and Christians are called to better conduct.
on November 19, 2010 at 8:14 PM Jessi (ycw)

Ah, I just figured out that I missed a large part of the conversation as I ran an errand in the middle of writing the comment before last; now things make a bit more sense.
on November 20, 2010 at 8:00 AM Mary Catherine

Well I can tell you a story that just happened recently:

A young man I know is very interested in this very attractive young woman. She is a typical promiscuous college student. He is not promiscuous.
He went to a party and asked her out. Her response was: “I can’t hook up with you tonight.”
His response was: “I don’t do that. I’m not interested in you for that. I like you.”
Her response: silence then, “You are the first man that has ever said that to me. Right now I like someone else (read I”m sleeping with someone else tonight).”

Analysis: it’s quite possible this girl hasn’t been treated well in the past within her family and friends and she currently likes the “bad” boys or wants to fit in.
She knows intuitively this behavior is bad for her and even possibly that it is morally wrong.
She keeps doing this because we often stick with what is comfortable. This is familiar and knowable.

Counsel: forget about her. Look for a young woman who has strong self esteem and believes that she is precious in the eyes of God and the man she is dating.
on November 20, 2010 at 8:22 AM L.

Alternative counsel: be a good friend to her. Perhaps she is promiscuous out of low self-esteem or another problem, or perhaps she is merely doing it out of curiosity (as some of us do), and will soon be bored with it, but in any case….everyone can use a friend.
on November 20, 2010 at 8:32 PM Mary Catherine

I have to disagree L. This young man has been trying to be this girl’s friend for almost 3 years.
Hasn’t worked.
Sometimes we have to leave others behind because they might also drag us down spiritually.
on November 20, 2010 at 8:33 PM Mary Catherine

I should also have said that this type of dating is called “missionary dating” and usually isn’t successful.
on November 20, 2010 at 11:08 PM L.

Well, I don’t the young man, Mary Catherine, and you do, so you know more of his situation than I ever will. If he has unrequited infatuation and unrealistic expectations that are interfering with the rest of his life, then yes, moving on sounds like a healthy thing to do. It’s similar to how an alcoholic should avoid spending time with friends who love to drink. I hope he founds a partner who shares his values.

“Missionary dating” sounds dreadful. I wasn’t talking about dating — I was talking about platonic friendship.

I am generally not in favor of cutting people out of one’s life completely, and have very rarely done it in my own life. (That said…I did sever all contact with a woman who had been my very best friend for 25 years. I believe her problems might be rooted in mental illlness, yet it reached a point where I no longer wanted her around my children, and no longer wanted her to think I condoned her words — and actions — with my presence in her life.) On the whole, I think in most cases, it’s best to stay around and offer friendship, if possible. And yeah, it’s not always possible!
on November 21, 2010 at 7:19 AM Jessi (ycw)

For the record:
My husband and I started “dating” (we didn’t really call it that, or know it, but we were) when he was a Christian and I was not.
I became a Christian.

And I would be the first to say, Don’t do it!

Why? Because nothing he did or said could change my heart toward God or my knowledge about God. When he told me he couldn’t keep seeing me if I was not a Christian, I said tell me more about what you believe. I pressured him to do things which were wrong (he gave in only partly). I decided I was willing to live a lie for him–but I could not change whether I believed in God.

It is only by the grace and mercy of God that I did come to know the truth, and God revealed Himself to me. Nothing my husband did, nothing he believed or acted on or told me, changed what I believed in my heart. But I knew he was serious about God, so I was willing to pretend.

As long as you can control it, Christians, do not let your son date a girl like I was–and if he’s beyond your control, exhort him that it’s not in his best interests.
on November 21, 2010 at 7:31 AM L.

For my part, Jessi, I would likely advise my children against dating an inflexible religious person, since radically different values are often incompatible in a relationship, and cause mostly pain to all parties.

But children have a funny way of growing into adults, and controlling their own lives and destinies.
on November 22, 2010 at 6:41 PM Barbara C.

Mary Catherine, you are right about so many points.

I remained a virgin until marriage. At least three guys dumped me because I wouldn’t sleep with them. Others would never consider asking me out because friends and acquaintances would tell them straight up that I didn’t put out. I had friends and co-workers in college who would have long group debates about whether I should or shouldn’t go ahead and have sex. In some ways I was kind of treated like a joke, a weirdo, and a mythical creature.

If you read books like those by Wendy Shalit where she talks about the millions of stories she’s heard about young girls and women who felt coerced into sexual acts that they didn’t want to do to get or keep a boyfriend. The detrimental physical and psychological effects on women of the current hook-up culture exemplified by “Sex and the City” (such as the rise in eating disorders, depression, self-mutilation) have been documented. There are tons of books that look at the neurological and physical differences when it comes to sexual desire between men and women, and the new feminism of being as promiscuous as men works in the favor of men.

I have always had a ton of guy friends, and they have often told me that there are girls you screw and then there are girls that you take home to mom. And they usually aren’t the same. And these aren’t just jerks; these guys seem to have become very good husbands once they were ready to settle down.

Mary Catherine, I totally sympathize with you. As the mother of four daughters, I pray every day for the good Lord to prayer good husbands for them.
on November 22, 2010 at 8:23 PM Gerard M. Nadal

Barbara,

“I have always had a ton of guy friends, and they have often told me that there are girls you screw and then there are girls that you take home to mom. And they usually aren’t the same. And these aren’t just jerks; these guys seem to have become very good husbands once they were ready to settle down.”

That’s well known among men. So women aren’t doing themselves any favors by using sex to try to win affirmation.
on November 22, 2010 at 8:46 PM L.

I agree women aren’t doing themselves favors by using sex to win affirmation — but that’s not the reason that many of us chose to become sexually active.

I was one of those (ahem!) “girls you screw.” And one of boys I (ahem!) “screwed” as a teenage took me home to his mom, and even wanted to marry me — though I resisted marriage for many years.
on November 22, 2010 at 9:47 PM Mary Catherine

Of course, L, you were the exception. (good grief)

Barbara,
Having 3 girls I got them early on and told them not to do this. I have talked to them about this on many different levels. Sadly, seeing classmates walking around school heavily pregnant and then disappearing from school never to return is probably the biggest motivator to NOT engage in premarital sex.
I have a few friends whose husbands were very promiscuous prior to marriage who deeply regret this now. They also have no idea whether or not they ever fathered a baby with some of these women and whether abortion was involved.
Wendy Shalit is very good. I’ve read several of her books and I highly recommend them.
The sexual revolution, while appearing to benefit women is in fact a great deal for men. They are no longer required to have any self-mastery and they call the shots today. You either sleep with them or get dumped.
I’ve seen it so many times across all age groups.
Men are in a permanent state of “sowing their wild oats” to the detriment of society, women and children. And I place the blame squarely at the feet of women – contracepting women.
on November 22, 2010 at 9:59 PM L.

If I was the exception, Mary Catherine, then why are you claiming that chaste women have so many problems finding like-minded boyfriends? I think I am far from the “exception.”

Also, how do you define “promiscuous?” Does everyone who chooses to have any sex outside of marriage fit this definition?

I am a contracepting woman, even in marriage (and actually, since my marriage is only civil, I guess it doesn’t count, and I remain a “fornicator” in the eyes of some). So maybe I’m not the “exception,” in that way, since I am not in a Christian marriage.

But I am far from the exception in society. My story is quite common, as is the fact that I have no regrets about the way I lived my life. In fact, if I had to do one thing differently, I would have delayed marriage even longer.

Here’s the kicker, though: While a chaste life wasn’t the right path for me, I think it’s a valid path for others who choose it.

I think chaste men and women need to be supported and encouraged. I have chosen to live my life a very different way, but apparently some see the very existence of women like me (“girls you screw”) threatens those who claim there is only one way?

I therefore readily accept — in fact, I embrace — the blame you lay “squarely at my feet.” I treasure it, in fact.
on November 22, 2010 at 10:12 PM Mary Catherine

There is only one way L: to be chaste before marriage and to be with only one man – the man you marry.

It is the ONLY way because sex is not a recreational act – it is a very special mutually exclusive act of self-giving between two committed persons – a man and a woman and it is to be open at all times to the possibility of the incarnation of that love in the form a new human life.

Anything less, is trashing the gift and irreverent. It is not the way God designed us nor is it his intention that we treat such a beautiful act in such a demeaning way.

I am sorry that you embrace your sins. May God have mercy on you.
on November 22, 2010 at 10:15 PM L.

Thank you, Mary Catherine. I am not ashamed of who I am. There is nothing demeaning in the way I have lived — and continue to live — my life.

I also have nothing but respect for those who live according to different principles, for any reason.
on November 22, 2010 at 10:25 PM Mary Catherine

L, you sound so….. tolerant.

But I really don’t think that’s what’s going on here.

I think you are simply a soul who simply has no clue as to what has happened, nor of the consequences.

To be promiscuous is demeaning. It’s demeaning to womanhood and to women in general and it’s demeaning to the men you slept with.
The fact that you didn’t respect yourself and can’t recognize your behavior for what it is, is very sad indeed.

Good night.
on November 22, 2010 at 10:34 PM L.

I assure you, Mary Catherine, I am indeed quite tolerant — even of those who inists that the way I live my life is “demeaning,” and somehow damages them, and society at large.

I also assure you that my lifestyle is not demeaning to womanhood in the least, and nor to any of the men I slept with. One of whom I continue to sleep with.

I have nothing but respect for myself, and there is nothing to be sad about. As I said, the only thing I would do differently is delay marriage, because I don’t feel I was ready for it.
on November 22, 2010 at 10:51 PM Gerard M. Nadal

Gentles All,

No shaming here, please.
on November 22, 2010 at 11:00 PM L.

Dr. Nadal, that raise the rhetorical question: Is it possible to shame someone who is not ashamed herself? It’s like ostracizing someone who prefers to be apart from the group, anyway.

The things for which I am ashamed in my life were all failures to act to help others when I had the chance, and instead did nothing. Some of those failures will haunt me to my grave.
on November 23, 2010 at 10:21 PM L.

Mary Catherine, it is indeed odd that you think I’m “incapable” of shame, in light of what I said in the directly comment above yours.

While I am not ashamed of any aspect of my sexuality, or any of the ways I have expressed it in my life, I am quite ashamed of the many times I failed to reach out and help others in need.

Shame can be a negative, paralyzing emotion that prevents people from living their lives to the fullest, as they wallow in rumination.

But I do agree that sometimes, shame can be a healthy emotion, if it’s the first step toward healing — similar to the way that the use of condoms by male prostitutes can be a healthy first step on the way to another, more humane sexuality.
on November 23, 2010 at 10:24 PM L.

Odd — the comment to which I responded appeared in my email, but I don’t see it here yet.

Maybe it’s in Internet limbo, and will appear here shortly!
on November 24, 2010 at 6:43 AM Mary Catherine

What I said L before it was deleted was that shaming can have a positive effect.

If you have no shame you never consider what you did was wrong. Therefore, there is no path to forgiveness nor healing.

Done here. Since any comment I make is likely to be deleted.
on November 24, 2010 at 7:16 AM L.

It might not have been deleted — I replied to it immediately, since I happened to be on my break at work, reading my email. Sometimes, cross-posting too quickly can lead to glitches, at least in Blogger and Haloscan comments. I don’t know about WordPress, though.

It’s true that I have no shame about certain things, and yet I am very capable of shame, since I do feel it about other things. In some ways, my sense of shame is indeed part of my moral compass.

I would have to say, my shame is entirely self-inflicted. I am pretty much impervious to the shame others attempt to attach to me.

Mary Catherine, I have noticed you say, “For shame” a lot. You must truly believe that shame is a necessary step on the road to redemption, or you wouldn’t talk about it so much.
on November 30, 2010 at 3:28 PM Irene Muhs

I have patiently tried to get thorough the above discussion and must admit that time does not allow me to get through it all. But, I refer back to the very first letter from Mary Catherine wherein she expresses the desire to have something done to change the culture by reaching out in “some kind of ministry” to young men.
I’m delighted to tell you that our beloved Holy Father, JPII has done just that in his magnificent work that is now known as “The Theology of the Body”. He takes us back to our very beginning and walks through history with us to where we are now. It gives us a deep theological and scriptural understanding of who we are, what we’re about and where we’re headed.
This might sound too ‘heady’ for the average person to get through, and admittedly, to take it on requires patience, in spite of it’s beauty.
So, who’s doing what with it to help the above problem?
This work is just recently (probably less that ten years ago) coming into it’s own and is springing up like flowers everywhere.
Good Catholic Universities are teaching it, Study Groups are working on it, Campus Ministers and Youth Ministers are introducing it, Youth Conferences ( such as the Steubenville Conferences) for High School Students are teaching it.
Young men and women are at last receiving the message they’ve been craving….having been starved for some 40 years for the true meaning of life and love.
Meantime, they have been looking for love in all the wrong places…..putting their souls and their very lives at risk, to say nothing of what it has done to our culture. Marriage and family life have suffered severely because of it.
To hear and understand and accept the teachings of John Paul II puts us into a place of utter and absolute respect for the other person….a place where it would be unthinkable to “use” the other. A place where men and women understand the beautiful meaning of their sexuality…..to embrace it as God’s gift so they may live and love according to the Divine Plan.
Apart from that plan there is, and will always be, loneliness, isolation and pain.
Pie in the sky, you say? Not by a long shot. It’s happening….I’ve seen it. Go on line and check out the resources, they are many. It’s been broken down for the folks in the pews, for the kids, for Married Couples….for everyone.
Theology of The Body is the name.
Be patient and pray and study. We’ve been 40 years in this mess. We each must help by doing our part.

In the Marriage ceremony we hear, “Love is man’s origin, Love is His constant calling, Love is HIs fulfillment in heaven.
This is what we seek…..GO FOR IT!

I will not be able to enter into the above debate, but will pray that some will find hope and consolation by pursuing and spreading the message….that sex really is a very holy gift.