Quote book

"True love, love that is interiorly full, is one in which we choose a person for his own sake; thus in it a man chooses a woman and a woman a man not merely as a 'partner' for sexual life, but as a person to whom he or she wants to give his or her life." -- Bl. John Paul II in "Love and Responsibility"

The new translation of "Love and Responsibility"

Prof. Ignatik

On April 22, I was able to attend the book launch of the new translation of Karol Wojtyla's classic work, "Love and Responsibility."  The launch was held at the John Paul II Institute in Washington, DC, where the translator, Grzegorz Ignatik, is a Ph.D. candidate.  

Why is there a new translation?  There are quite a few reasons that were outlined during the book launch:

• In 2001, Pope John Paul II offered revisions to his original work in Polish that are reflected in the new translation.
• It includes the first English publication of Karol Wojtyla's 1974 essay, "On the Meaning of Spousal Love," which was, at least in part, a response to initial criticisms of "Love and Responsibility."
• It provides a smoother translation.
• Grzegorz Ignatik said that the goal of the new translation was to faithfully reflect the original text in its depth and beauty.  The goal was also to let Karol Wojtyla truly "speak."  Prof. Ignatik added, "I hope that you will find his English perfect."
• The new translation is more apparent, keeping ambiguities from the original text and including original Polish words in parenthesis.
• All of Karol Wojtyla's footnotes, as well as his introduction to the text are included.  (Apparently, in the previous translation some of the footnotes were deleted, while others were placed incorrectly.)
• There is more consistency in the translation, resulting in simplicity and precision.  In the older translation, many words are translated differently throughout the text, making it more difficult to see what Karol Wojtyla was saying.  For example, one word was translated 15 different ways in the older text, including as experience, feeling, emotion, response, reaction, etc.  In the new translation, the word is "lived experience," which is an exact translation of Wojtyla's word.
• The endnotes, provided by Grzegorz Ignatik, include explanations of the words and concepts, translations of foreign words, and explanations of why words were translated in a particular way.  The notes, however, are meant to be secondary or auxiliary, as Wojtyla's text itself is the main substance of the book.  

Although I have not yet begun reading the new translation, after paging through it, I am looking forward to diving in.  It looks like an excellent improvement to the old work and appears to be much easier to read (though still theologically challenging).  Having read the old translation more than once, I know that Bl. John Paul II's pre-papal work on the nature of love is an excellent resource, and I can only imagine how much more this new translation communicates what our world needs to hear today about love, responsibility, marriage, fruitfulness and chastity. 

Prolonged adolescence of young women

When most hear the relatively new phrase in sociological circles “prolonged adolescence,” images come to mind of twentysomething men in their favorite college hoodies gathered around the Playstation with a stripe of tomato sauce on their faces from the day-old meat lover’s pizza left on the counter. The picture is complete with fear of commitment, loud burping, living in the parents’ basement and piles of dirty dishes in the no-longer-visible sink.

But do young ladies experience their own version of prolonged adolescence in today’s me-driven culture? It seems that women’s prime symptom of prolonged adolescence is glimpsed in their friendships with other young women.

Perhaps in their search for faithful, committed relationships, young women are using their female friends as replacement “spouses.” In their fear of losing another relationship, young women are clutching on to their female friends as tightly as a little child holds a plastic trinket. In their determination to not let go, they simultaneously are unable to open their hands to receive new friendships. When these new friendships include the possibility of a romantic relationship with a young man, the result is often Mr. Committed walking away wondering why the girl he pursued won’t open to receive his gift of self.

It’s not that young women aren’t generous, loving or eager to give. In fact, their close female friendships can be full of giving, sharing and generosity. But they become so focused on the security blanket of their female friends – who can’t “break up” with them – that they often become unconsciously closed to others.

All of the compliments, presents, affirmations, backrubs and chats in the world offered within the fearful hoarding of prolonged adolescent female friendships ironically become me-focused instead of other-focused, turning generosity on its head.

For men, prolonged adolescence involves a security blanket of maintaining the activities, locations and friends of the past. The comfort zone of women takes the form of close, and even closed-in, friendships with one another.

Could this fear of loss of commitment turned overly committed friendship syndrome arise from the prolificacy of divorced families of origin? Could our fears, concerns and desire to safeguard relationships come from our lack of examples of faithfulness?

There is also a fear of vulnerability. Rather than expose a desire for love, women take what they have and hoard, hold and suffocate in a frenzied panic not to lose what they have. Rather than open themselves to the possibility of hurt, disappointment or rejection, young women create a sense of commitment, possession and independence that unsuspectingly can counter their desires for love. While they create walls to protect the love and friendships they have, they are consequently building an impenetrable fortress through which the new love and relationships they desire can barely hope to pass.

Just as the prolonged adolescence of young men results in an inability to foster good relationships, female prolonged adolescent friendships affect women’s ability to love rightly. Not only is there a lack of vulnerability, but young women who unconsciously treat their female friends as their make-do “spouses” are unconsciously emasculating their future husbands.

Rather than appreciate Mr. Right as the man he is, they question his inability to determine who is the right match for Susie, why Peter’s text message seemed abrupt and which bridal gown is the best style for a particular celebrity. When he can’t behave as her best friend does, then what is wrong with him, they wonder. In reality, Mr. Right has been given the impossible standard of being like his girlfriend’s female friends. Taylor Swift’s Saturday Night Live skit last year illustrated this reality.

Giggles over crushes, whispers over guys’ “cuteness” and games of “who likes who” seem to lend themselves more to one’s future pre-teen daughter than to friends in their third decade of life. Certainly this can’t be any more attractive to men than their stereotypical piles of dirty dishes are to women.

All of this is not to deny the gift of female friendships. Young women are right to cultivate friendships with one another. There are innumerable ways in which same-sex female friendships can assist each party in growing in holiness and growing in an identity rooted in Christ. The beginning to a true friendship rooted in Christ is the realization of its presence as a gift to be received and appreciated, and not as an object to be grasped and hoarded.

Perhaps when young men chuck their 24-hour video game marathons to admit to their need for something more, and young women widen their circle of friendships to admit they are longing to give and receive a total and faithful gift of self, we can begin to implement the challenge of John Paul II:

“The skill in giving and receiving which is typical of love is exhibited by the man whose attitude to a woman is informed by total affirmation of her value as a person, and equally by the woman whose attitude to a man is informed by affirmation of his value as a person. This skill creates the specific climate of betrothed love – the climate of surrender of the innermost self" ("Love and Responsibility," 129).

*** This article originally appeared on TOB.CatholicExchange.com. Since the site no longer exists, I am re-posting many of my old articles on my blog.

"Innocence"

I wish this video were available on YouTube, so I could embed it on the blog. But you'll just have to trust me that it's worth clicking the link in order to watch. And I don't want to say much about it, so as to not spoil its effect.

You can watch the video here.

Reasons for modesty

Marcel LeJeune provides a wonderful list of "Top 10 Reasons Women Should Dress Modestly."

Here are the first five:

10 - Modesty reflects an understanding of who a woman truly is.
Modesty starts inside a person's heart and mind. Who am I? Why do I exist? If a woman answers she is a beautiful daughter of God, then modesty will naturally follow.


9 - Modesty isn't about dressing in unattractive clothes as some think it is.
There are too many options in clothing to not give modesty a try. Yes, it might not be the first thing on the rack you go shopping for, but it is worth finding clothing that brings out a woman's beauty without revealing too much.


8 - Modesty attracts the kind of guys you ought to want to attract.
If a woman is afraid that she must turn a man's eye by dressing immodestly, then she should ask herself just what kind of guy does she want to attract?


7 - Mary dressed modestly.
Truly there is no more beautiful woman who ever lived than Mary. Why wouldn't any woman want to be more like her?


6 - It helps protect women.
A woman can still dress to be beautiful, but the mystery of a woman's body is protected from being used. Modesty provides a needed defense against usage.

But you'll need to head over to Aggie Catholics to read the rest.

Quote book

"For love is never something ready made, something merely 'given' to man and woman, it is always at the same time a 'task' which they are set. Love should be seen as something which in a sense never 'is' but is always only 'becoming,' and what it becomes depends upon the contribution of both persons and the depth of their commitment. This commitment is based on what is 'given.'" -- Pope John Paul II, Love and Responsibility 139.

Fake dating

Well, the New York Times has done it again. I'm quite certain that I should avoid sipping my coffee when I venture onto their Fashion and Style page. My computer would probably fail to operate, as the coffee would likely land on the keyboard in my shock.

So, what is it this time?

"Cloud Girlfriend" -- a new website that allows users to create a fake profile in order to find other people with fake profiles to begin a fake relationship, with the thought that perhaps the fake relationship could become real.

No, I'm not kidding.

From the story:

The new incarnation of the company raises interesting questions: Can two consciously misrepresented people flirt privately and rewardingly? And can that experience blossom into a relationship?

The online gaming world indicates there’s potential. Mr. Fuhriman has described the site’s current iteration as a combination of Match.com and Second Life, an online role-playing game wherein users create avatars — idealized selves — to navigate virtual worlds. Players in such games have fallen in love and even married.

Sarah Smith-Robbins, a professor at Indiana University specializing in social media, said that because avatars are highly customizable forms of self-expression, other players can infer things about the player’s true personality from them.

Relationships starting with total fabrication could succeed, she guessed, but perhaps not often in meaningful ways.

“It’s going to be the equivalent of a nightclub,” she said, adding, “Maybe you hit it off, and you go home together, but the next day it’s a completely different world.”

It looks like this new venture into online dating has completely missed the magic ingredient of a relationship -- two human persons. How can there possibly be a relationship in which two people are knowingly and willingly attempting to be someone else? But the website's promo video advises, "Feel free to be creative. Remember, you're creating the ultimate you."

There is inherent risk and vulnerability in a real life relationship. Difficult? Certainly. But to take this important ingredient out is to ensure that one's "relationship" will be meaningless, unfulfilling and ultimately degrading. Instead of a relationship that affirms the value of both people, this website can't help but enhance a lack of confidence in who one truly is. And if we can't find ourselves except in a sincere gift of ourselves, and if we can't give of ourselves unless we have an awareness of who we are and what we are giving, then how can a site like this be anything but a dead end street, walking us right into heartache, disappointment and futility?

The logic of "Cloud Girlfriend" is a far cry from the beauty of "Love and Responsibility," in which the future John Paul II ponders the dignity of the human person and how this inherent beauty and goodness can be best affirmed in a loving, chaste relationship. After all, a person can only be loved and never used as an object.

"Love is possible"

One of my guest professors at the John Paul II Institute (where, incidentally, I graduated one year ago today), Stanislaw Grygiel, and his wife Ludmilla, share their reflections on John Paul II's pre-papal ministry to young married couples and their families. The Grygiels knew John Paul in Poland.

The article is quite beautiful, but I must highlight a portion:

He was a spiritual father and teacher, but also a student. He learned the truth of love that links a man and a woman, and of motherhood and fatherhood, from the laypeople he served. This knowledge is expressed in his letters and literary works, especially in the book Love and Responsibility, and in the plays The Jeweler's Shop and The Radiation of Fatherhood. It was obvious that the knowledge he imparted, first as a priest and later as pope, was not merely a result of theological and philosophical studies, but also of pastoral ministry and personal experience. John Paul II was certain that a beautiful and pure love is possible and that Catholic married life does not require the impossible. This certainty made him a trustworthy mentor for the young around the world.

A good example of this took place in 1980, when Czesław Miłosz, a Polish writer lecturing at the University of California, Berkeley, visited Rome with his son after receiving the Nobel Prize. We were invited along with them to Mass with the pope in a private chapel and then to breakfast. At the end of the conversation, Milosz's son turned to John Paul II requesting him to relax the Church's "too strict" teaching about conjugal morality. By requiring premarital abstinence and prohibiting contraception, he argued, the pope would lose a great chance to raise young people to the Church, because these teachings were impossible to follow in the 20th century. John Paul II, after hearing this argument with a kindly smile, assured the young interlocutor that the teaching of the Church was feasible and, what is more, that he personally knew many young people who lived according to the Church's teachings. In saying this, he certainly had before his eyes numerous friends who formed happy families in accordance with the Church's wisdom.

Be sure to read it all.

"This is absolutely disturbing."

It's interesting that my reaction to this clip on Fox News is the words of one of the interviewees. First, let me explain ...

A police officer in Toronto, quoted as saying, "Women can avoid rape by not dressing like sluts" and subsequent "Slut walks" were the occasion for a little chat about modesty on Sean Hannity's program. All participants in the debate agreed that rape is never the fault of the victim. The question on the table, however, was whether or not women can reduce their risk of abuse and rape, and if so, whether or not choices in dress can be a factor.

The two women facing off were Tamara Holder, a Fox news contributor, who sported a plunging neckline and a rather angry demeanor. Rebecca St. James, well-known in Christian circles for her song, "Wait for Me," had a more conservative, though attractive, outfit, and seemed to be operating from a sphere of peacefulness and joy, which perhaps spoke louder than her words.

A couple of segments that found my mouth on the floor:

Rebecca St. James: "There has to be a responsibility for what the woman is wearing ... personal responsibility. [...] Purity and modesty go hand in hand. I think when a woman is dressing in an immodest way, a provocative way, she's got to think about what is she saying by her dress, because to a lot of guys -- and I just wrote another book about it called, What Is He Thinking, I interviewed these guys and they're saying ..."

Sean Hannity: "One of them is me."

Tamara Holder: "This is absolutely disturbing."

Later in the interview:

Rebecca St. James: "Tamara, I mean, what are women saying by dressing provocatively? I mean, I think they're saying, 'I'm easy. I'm asking you to look at me as a sexual object, rather than a woman worthy of respect.' And I think women who are marching and saying, 'I should be able to wear whatever I want' ..."

Tamara Holder: "There is nothing wrong with looking like a sexual object."

I suppose these words can only be truly horrifying to those who understand what they truly mean. In other words, Tamara Holder cannot possibly know what she is saying, or she could never say it. In effect, she would be saying, "I am not a woman. I am not a person. I am an animal, an object. I do not need to be loved or to love. There is nothing wrong with using me or with me using others." And the irony of this logic is that it undermines the first reason these two women were on the show -- to acknowledge that women should not be used, abused or raped. But to say, "There is nothing wrong with looking like a sexual object," is to say there is nothing wrong with being perceived as a sexual object, which is really to say there is nothing about my dignity as a human person that should preclude me from being treated like a sexual object.

Interestingly, I think the whole argument of whether or not rape is wrong stands on this ground -- am I an object or am I a person? If I am an object, then I can be used as a tool to satisfy someone else's desires. Likewise, I can use others as a means to an end. But if I am a person -- if I have gifts, talents, a history, a personality -- then I can only be treated with love. Nothing else befits my dignity. And therefore, rape, abuse or using of any sort can never be justified.

So maybe arguments about the necessity or not of modesty are much more integral to the question of how women should be treated than many will concede. If we look at modesty as a constricting command to hide inside a potato sack, then we aren't understanding the gift that it is. If we look at modesty, however, as an opportunity to radiate the truth of who we are in God's image and likeness, as a means of protecting the gift of ourselves and of inspiring love and respect, then modesty can only serve to further defend the incredible dignity of each human person -- never to be used, always to be loved.

"Twilight" and chastity -- love or use?

Twilight is frequently touted as a pro-chastity series. While I have not read the books or seen the movies, I have done some research on the topic. An article by Dr. Christine Schintgen in Catholic Insight highlights the message of the series, contrasted with an authentic understanding of chastity.

For those who have read or watched Twilight, or who have children who do so, I highly recommend reading the article.

A few highlights:

The effect of this kind of writing is no doubt to encourage young women, or girls, to find boyfriends with whom they can avoid going all the way, but with whom they can indulge their physical desires, just stopping short of the act. The result in reality, as we know, will be that they will end up having sex, because that is how our bodies are made. Twilight presents a kind of ‘mythology of the body’ in which ‘making out’ is of a totally different order from, and virtually unconnected with, sexual intercourse. Unfortunately, this myth is pervasive in our society, even, sadly, in many Christian circles. Very often we fail, in our catechesis, to explain the reality that any deliberate stimulation of sexual desire in the other or in ourselves is in fact a violation of the virtue of chastity. Such behaviour leads to and in fact participates in the Culture of Death by encouraging people to treat one another as objects for use rather than as persons, and by denying God’s laws with respect to sexuality.

And:

Quite apart from the overtly sexual nature of the Twilight novels, readers should be concerned also about the extent to which they encourage a kind of romantic obsession that is itself unchaste. With great insight, John Paul II writes that the pleasure men and women sometimes use each other for may not be explicitly sexual; for some people—and women are particularly prone to this weakness—the emotional high associated with romance can be pursued as an end in itself, with a member of the opposite sex as the means to this end. Thus, the very fact that Bella and Edward are completely obsessed with each other—they live for each other, and don’t see the point of living without the other—promotes an unhealthy sort of monomania in readers that is very far from chaste, and that may leave readers vulnerable to being taken advantage of by unscrupulous suitors.

Read the whole article here.

Quote book

"The person who does not decide to love forever will find it very difficult to really love for even one day." -- Pope John Paul II

Inappropriate Accordian

My latest article on Catholic Exchange reminds us that we can look for ways to build a culture of life and a civilization of love no matter where we go: http://catholicexchange.com/2010/11/15/141434/.