As Alicia Colon wrote in the New York Sun last week, I will be at the Ball for Life on May 11. Mexican screen star Eduardo Verástegui of the acclaimed film "Bella" will be there, as will Celeste Holm, Patricial Neal, and many other luminaries will be there. I'm particularly looking forward to meeting Monsignor Jim Lisante, who did a phone interview with me on his radio show last December (which may be heard online).
Chris Slattery of Expectant Mother Care, which along with Good Counsel Homes is a beneficiary of the ball, has contacted me to let me know he will give a special "Friend of Dawn Eden" discount to anyone who contacts him for a ticket to the event. I don't know the exact discount, but I know that in the past, the ball's organizers have been very flexible on ticket rates in order to make it possible for young adult pro-life supporters to attend the event. If you'd like to take advantage of the discount, write me at the address on left (or via my handy-dandy contact form and I'll send you Chris's phone number.
My train's conductor was in a chatty mood tonight.
I learned that he began his current job last year after 10 years as a Marine. He did tours of duty in Kosovo — "we dropped bombs, then food; makes no sense" — and Iraq.
When I told him I was a writer, he said he could never do that. "I know how to shoot things," he shrugged.
But then he started talking about his kids.
He has a daughter who just started school, and a son who's a toddler. Last year, he began attending a local Methodist church, to give his kids a Christian upbringing. His daughter loves it, he said. "She wants to go there all the time."
The conductor's Saturday night shift ends at 3:30 a.m. Church starts at 9:30. The dad and his kids arrive a little late, but they get there.
His son doesn't like church so much, being at an age when he is more interested in breaking things and throwing them— not necessarily in that order. The daughter is usually far better behaved — though she did once pour a drink right through the TV's ventilation holes, frying the circuits.
The conductor, who wasn't wearing a wedding ring, didn't mention if he lived with his children's mother, and I didn't ask, not wanting to pry. He just seemed happy to be having a conversation where he wasn't telling a passenger to pay the $5 on-train ticket penalty.
He went on about the time he spends with his kids — how he manages to get no more than four hours' sleep at a time, since he always has to be there for one or both of his children. For this former Marine, being a dad is "the hardest work there is."
"And the most rewarding," I said hopefully.
He gave an emphatic "yes."
It strikes me that there is something wrong with a culture that tells this man that he is somehow less valuable than a man who makes more money or has more job skills. The same goes for a culture that tells a woman she is less valuable if, rather than taking the opportunity to graduate college at the earliest opportunity, or getting a solid footing in a career, she instead becomes a full-time mother.
Being a devoted parent is the most important job in the world. We should never forget that.
UPDATE: False alarm! Father Rob is fine, says Mark Shea now. (One of his readers credits it to "retroactive prayer"!)
Mark Shea reports that Father Rob Johansen (a past contributor to National Review Online who used to blog at Thrown Back) has suffered a heart attack and it is uncertain whether he will pull through. Please pray for him.
Seasoned professionals from all disciplines frequently lend their expertise to the letters section of the New York Times. This week, one Richard Zweig, M.D., weighs in on the Supreme Court's recent decision, in Carhart vs. Gonzales, on partial-birth abortion:
I am a rheumatologist caring for a patient whose lupus nephritis is flaring. Her creatinine is rising as her platelet count falls, and she has failed to improve with pulse methylprednisolone and intravenous cyclophosphamide. I am contemplating using rituximab. I would like to refer this case to the United States Supreme Court for its guidance.
Dr. Zweig presumably means to underscore the folly of state interference in the affairs of learned physicians who devote their lives to the study of medicine and the spelling of multi-syllable chemical compounds. I'm no doctor, but arguments like this make me want to reach for the nearest bottle of acetaminophen.
First, note that under his own premises, Dr. Zweig must be at least as out-of-his-league on the issue as he claims the Supreme Court to be. He's a rheumatologist, not a obstetrician. He's no more qualified, medically speaking, to prescribe a late-term abortion than Associate Justice Ginsburg -- however eager they both might be to do so. So if the high court opinion is bad medicine, Dr. Zweig's opinion of the opinion is little better.
But the opinion is law, not medicine, an area in which Zweig has far less expertise than the court to opine. Certainly his theory that the state cannot or should not regulate medicine is nonsensical. The FDA, a government agency, approves or disapproves treatments and medications all the time. Dr. Zweig could not "contemplate using rituximab" to treat lupus nephritis if the FDA forbade him. I suspect he would approve of state action to prohibit a doctor from using rituximab to treat acne, or aspirin to cure leukemia. He might even appeal to the state to interfere on his behalf if he found that some abortionist down the street was practicing rheumatology.
What Zweig really means is that he thinks the Supreme Court ignored an alleged consensus in the medical community when it upheld Congress' finding that partial birth abortion was almost never medically necessary. However, if he reads Times in addition to writing to it, he might recall the article which helped spur Congress to action in the first place:
An Abortion Rights Advocate Says He Lied About Procedure
A prominent member of the abortion rights movement said today that he lied in earlier statements when he said a controversial form of late-term abortion is rare and performed primarily to save the lives or fertility of women bearing severely malformed babies.
He now says the procedure is performed far more often than his colleagues have acknowledged, and on healthy women bearing healthy fetuses.
Ron Fitzsimmons, the executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, said he intentionally misled in previous remarks about the procedure, called intact dilation and evacuation by those who believe it should remain legal and "partial-birth abortion" by those who believe it should be outlawed, because he feared that the truth would damage the cause of abortion rights.
* * *
In the vast majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along, Mr. Fitzsimmons said. "The abortion-rights folks know it, the anti-abortion folks know it, and so, probably does everyone else."
As even former NARAL president Kate Michelman conceded in her 2004 book, With Liberty and Justice for All, "Fitzsimmons had lied, indefensibly and unnecessarily, and the credibility of every pro-choice advocate was now under suspicion." The dissent in Carhart only confirms that "medical necessity" is a largely invented issue. In discussing the primary reasons for late-term abortions, Justice Ginsburg relies on a study indicating that adolescent and indigent women simply discover their pregnancies later than most.
Dr. Zweig's complaint is little more than a variant of the old saying that every abortion, for any reason, is a matter for the woman, her doctor and her God. Retreating somewhat from that theory, the Supreme Court has offered a remedy for some of those cases in which God has left the room.
12:00 AM |
A man who looked to be in his 20s came up to me after I spoke at the Manhattan Theology on Tap — where I mentioned I had just endured a breakup — and told me he could relate because his girlfriend had just broken up with him.
She left him, he said, because he wanted to be chaste.
My experiences at the dozens of other talks I've given since The Thrill of the Chaste came out have made me realize that the young man's experience is not an isolated phenomenon. While feminists and conservative moralists alike often portray men as being more likely than women to pressure a partner into sex, I've found that, when men are determined to be chaste, they often face great resistance from their girlfriends.
I don't believe that this phenomenon is primarily because women want sexual pleasure. I believe that it has to do with what a woman believes she gains when she introduces sex, or any kind of sexually exciting physical contact, into a relationship.
From my own experience, I know that when I am dating a man chastely, I am far more naked with him than if we were having sex. I'm more vulnerable, because I can't interrupt a dispute with a passionate kiss, and I can't push him to show affection by stroking him. If there is silence between us on a date, I have to trust that it is a positive silence and not a negative one — or I have to come right out and ask him which kind it is. There are then no shortcuts to building intimacy, only honest communication and the experience of one another's presence.
A couple of weeks ago, after I gave a talk, a woman came up to me and told me that, while she was not a faithful Catholic, her boyfriend, whom she believed was the one, was devoted to the faith — and he wanted to be chaste.
"And it's killing me," she said.
It was obvious from her expression that she wasn't talking about being filled with sexual frustration. She was emotionally distraught because she lacked the consolation of sexual intimacy.
Initiating sexual contact in a nonmarital relationship brings consolation because it brings control. If one fears rejection — a fear that is intensified if one has experienced the divorce of one's parents — then, by initiating sexual contact, one may gain the upper hand. One then has the power to take away what one has brought into a relationship — to be the agent of the breakup, if one so chooses.
"You have to get used to being loved for who you are," I told the woman with the chaste boyfriend.
"The other men didn't love you for what was inside you," I went on. "This one does. You have to believe that the beauty he sees inside you is real."
I might as well have been speaking to myself. I know how hard it is to believe that a man could love you so much that he would want to wait to have sex with you until he has vowed to present himself as a gift to you and accept the gift that you are to him, forever.
But I just can't imagine any other way to live. Once you realize what marital love is, and how much higher it is than any mere erotic love, the idea of any kind of lesser arrangement seems cynical. Even in the absence of a boyfriend, when I have the opportunity to deepen my friendships with those who are close to me, I know I am worth enough that I don't have to accept affection that lacks permanence.
Last night, I had the honor of appearing alongside fellow panelist Monsignor William B. Smith, S.T.D., and moderator Father Jim Lloyd at a discussion called "All About Sexual Morality" before a standing-room-only crowd of about 70 people in the rectory of the Church of St. Paul the Apostle. The discussion was the second in a two-part series organized by Father Lloyd along with Bob Moran, a Catholic psychotherapist who wanted to educate lay Catholics about the Church's views on sexual topics that are not normally discussed from the pulpit.
Monsignor Smith, a longtime professor at St. Joseph's Seminary, gave an enlightening talk on the theology of the body. I made a lot of mental notes; everything he said was relevant to the messages I try to communicate in my talks, and he has a tremendous knowledge base of Church teaching. (More on that in a moment.)
The beginning of his talk was particularly inspiring, as he explained how the Church's teachings on sex are not arbitrary rules; they derive from God's purposes in creating us. I can't recall his exact words, but the message as I understood it was that God gave a moral law not to make us miserable, but rather to bring us joy. He designed us, after all, and He knows what kind of life will unite us to Him.
That is one of the truths that helped draw me into the Church. Hearing Smith articulate it reminded me that I need to voice it more often when explaining my choice to become chaste.
Speaking after the monsignor was daunting. I told the audience that it reminded me of the "Ed Sullivan Show," where a great act like the Beatles would be followed by some guy spinning plates. (Like Smith, the Beatles had cool collars too, though I guess the similarities end there.)
That tremendous knowledge base I mentioned came into play when I mentioned during my talk that a purpose of marriage, according to the Church, was that each spouse should make a gift of himself to the other, to bring the other closer to heaven. As I said this, realizing that I didn't want to mischaracterize the Church's teaching, I turned to Lloyd and Smith and asked if I was stating it correctly. Where, I asked, was it in the Catechism?
The priests were reluctant to answer, because, they both said, they didn't want to distract from my talk. At any rate, Lloyd said, what I was saying was correct. There was a moment of silence and I was about to resume speaking. Just as I was opening my mouth, Smith called out, "No. 1602."
I already thought the monsignor was cool, but he gained levels of coolness for being able to reel that number off the top of his head. One day, I want to be able to call out Catechism paragraph numbers the way I used to be able to toss off 1960s Hot 100 chart positions.
* * *
During the Q&A period, one young woman of about 20 asked me how she could tell her boyfriend — with whom she had been having sex — that she wanted to be chaste.
It's a very tough question. I answered it as best I could. One thing I told her, since she said she loved her boyfriend, was that she should tell him that she wanted to have a marriage with him that would last — that she didn't want it to end as her parents' marriage had, or as another relative's had. (I had already mentioned the high divorce rate for couples who cohabitate; their overreliance on their sexual bond is believed to contribute to their failure to develop emotional intimacy.)
Afterwards, the young woman came up to me, crying. She told me that she had been touched by what I had said, including what I had revealed about my own journey to chastity.
I gave her a hug, some encouraging words, and a copy of my book, and told her I would pray for her. I'd like to ask that you please pray for her too, although I can't reveal her name.
Later, I told Bob Moran about the young woman's tears. He observed, "She represents millions."
I had forgotten what a delightful song this was (and an unusually chaste video to boot):
It's the La's, from Liverpool (natch), from 1988, with the original version of the song that was later a hit for Sixpence None the Richer. I had also forgotten how thin the recording was; so light-sounding for its time. It was called neo-Merseybeat, but it sounds more like sunshine pop. Best of luck getting it out of your head.
Dr. Albert Mohler's interview with me is now online! Here's what his Web site says about it:
Program Title: Recovering Our Vocabulary: The Language of Chastity
Description: Dawn Eden’s The Thrill of the Chaste has caught the attention of both Christians and non-Christians alike. Her book is unapologetically counter-cultural, arguing that even more important than abstinence, Christians need to recover a biblical theology of chastity. Ms. Eden joins us in the studio on today’s program for a fantastic conversation you won’t want to miss.
* * *
Come hear me speak tomorrow night at "All About Sexual Morality," a panel discussion with Monsignor William Smith. Rectory, St. Paul the Apostle. 415 West 59th St. in Manhattan, 7 p.m., free. I'll also be signing copies of The Thrill.
1:38 AM |
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Harper's Bazaar (U.K.!) gets The Thrill
The May issue of the British edition of Harper's Bazaar features The Thrill of the Chaste in A.L. Kennedy's satirical article "Dear prudence ..." Kennedy, who is Scottish, writes that the rise of fellow Scot Gordon Brown, who is expected to be Britain's next prime minister, portends the era of the "New Presbyterians," "a prudent regiment of strait-laced folk."
Accompanying the article is a graphic delineating the various breeds of "New Consumers," including the "New Presbyterians." Their "book-group choice" is none other than The Thrill, its cover juxtaposed against an image of Brown:
Like a good "New Presbyterian," I showed the piece to my priest, Father George Rutler. He said that he believed it was Mae West who said there was no such thing as bad publicity.
Enjoying the gorgeous afternoon in midtown yesterday.
ALSO: Karol of Alarming News has posted a photo from her birthday party later that same day, showing me digging the company of old friends James Taranto and Todd Seavey. Todd is "Tom" in Chapter 18 of my book and doesn't mind who knows it. He is most likely the one of the two who made me laugh, although it's a close call.
I had the pleasure of giving an interview to Dr. Albert Mohler, the theologian and president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, while in Louisville last week; the show was taped and will air tomorrow at 5 p.m. Eastern time. You can hear it live on Dr. Mohler's Web site, and a link to the show will be posted there after it airs.
I was in awe of Dr. Mohler. He's a brilliant thinker and a passionate defender of the culture of life. Being on his show and hearing him praise The Thrill of the Chaste was a true joy.
My friend Dennis Schenkel — who, along with the seminary he attends, St. Meinrad, hosted me while I was in that part of the country — was also impressed. He writes of the interview in his blog entry about our day together:
I sat in the control room the whole time, listening to the interview and their chatter between segments, and I had a chance to speak with him when they were finished taping the show. As I listened to him talk, and ask questions, and make a case for the recovery of a vocabulary of virtue, I could not distinguish him from a good Catholic thinker. (If he or his admirers read this, I hope they do not take offense.) I heard him praise John Paul as a sound philosopher, and Benedict as a first rate theologian, and he spoke well of the Theology of the Body, and talked about his own project putting together a similar framework that works in evangelical categories. I can't say enough good things about him. If there are Southern Baptist pastors back home who are trained by him, I don't know if we'll agree on everything, but we'll definitely be able to cooperate as regards the "social order."
During the show, Dr. Mohler talked about "recovering the language," a concept he described in a Touchstone article I highly recommend, about true ecumenism vs. the false kind: "Standing Together — Standing Apart: Cultural Co-belligerence Without Theological Compromise."
12:57 AM |
Saturday, April 21, 2007
'The highest court in the land says no to skull-collapsing'
Brenda from Brooklyn, whom an obstetrician attempted to target for death back in 1957, rejoices with "This is my brain, intact."
Good morning! Dean Abbott has very kindly posted an account of my talk at Cincinnati's Theology on Tap, which is good for me because, having just returned, I'm too tired to blog tonight. Will have some tidbits of good news and perhaps some photos of a surprise discovery I made at Newark Liberty Airport later tonight or tomorrow.
P.S. You can witness the full-body laughter Dean describes at the end of my video "Chastity Rome-Chick Blues".
“We need to describe what chastity is and what it isn’t. It’s not just a negative, it’s not just saying ‘no’ to sex before marriage. It’s a positive, saying ‘yes’ to your intrinsic value as a human being apart from your willingness to have sex, and saying ‘yes’ to the intrinsic value of another by not using them in away that violates their dignity.”
Planned Parenthood says 'Amen' to condoms in Christian-bashing 'Safe Sex Angels' TV ad
Planned Parenthood has long had a relationship of sorts with the Angel of Death; it invites him into its clinics a quarter-million times a year.
Now, the San Francisco branch of Margaret Sanger's organization — which receives over half its funding from taxpayers — is using "guardian angels" in Christian-bashing TV ads to persuade teenagers and young adults to wear condoms.
Planned Parenthood Golden Gate states in a press release that the commercial is intended for teenagers as well as young adults:
Tips for Talking with Teens: While the ad is aimed at young adults who are already sexually active, it may also be viewed by teens. The ad can create a perfect starting place for a parent/teen conversation on responsible sexual decision-making. Parents who would like tips for talking to their teens can find them at PPGG's web site at: www.ppgg.org/FamilyCommunication.htm.
Here is the rest of Planned Parenthood Golden Gate's press release (bold type added):
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 16, 2007
Amen for Safe Sex!
Safe Sex Angels are the Stars of Planned Parenthood Golden Gate's New "Safe is Sexy" Ad
SAN FRANCISCO - Planned Parenthood Golden Gate (PPGG) today released its latest "Safe is Sexy" ad aimed at encouraging young adults to act responsibly if they are sexually active. The ad uses irreverent humor and the unexpected to capture viewers' attention and get its "Safe is Sexy" message across. The thirty second spot features a hip, young couple that is saved from engaging in unprotected sex by divine intervention. The ad is aimed at youth ages 18-24 and will air throughout the next ten weeks on MTV, VH1 and FX.
"I love the fact that this ad challenges popular conceptions of religion and sexuality," said Lisa Sargent, Chaplain at Planned Parenthood Golden Gate. "I think it will really break through the clutter and get people thinking about sexual responsibility as part of their larger value system, which may be religiously influenced."
Nearly half of the more than six million pregnancies in the United States each year are unplanned, and if current rates continue, nearly half of all American women will face an unintended pregnancy at some point in their lives, according to the Guttmacher Institute.
"The goal of these ads is to remind people to act responsibly and use protection," said Dian Harrison, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Golden Gate. "Promoting prevention is at the core of our work at Planned Parenthood."
About the Ad: The ad opens with a young heterosexual couple in bed. The woman responsibly takes the lead and asks her partner if he has any protection, but he only shushes her and tells her not to ruin the moment. Meanwhile, a grungy looking angel with a paunch and beard stubble is perched at the head of the bed munching a container of popcorn. A fastidious female angel materializes beside him and demands to know why, as the Guardian Angel of Safe Sex, he isn't intervening. He tells her to keep her halo on and uses a remote control to rewind the scene, giving the man a second chance to do the right thing. This time when his partner asks if he has protection, he says, "Of course," and she responds with a heartfelt, "Amen!" Divine intervention saves the day.
Script: A young couple (early twenties) are embracing in bed.
Woman: "So, I guess I should ask if you have any…" Man: "Any what?" W: "You know." M: "Shhh. Let's not ruin the moment."
CUT TO: Sitting on the headboard is a male Angel intently watching the couple. He is nodding his head in seeming approval. Just then, a female Angel materializes beside him.
Girl Angel: "What are doing?" Boy Angel: "Uhh...I like to watch." Girl Angel: "You're sick." Girl Angel: "You know you're the Guardian Angel of Safe Sex? Are you gonna do something?" Boy Angel: "Alright, alright. Keep your halo on. Watch This." He points a T.V. remote at the couple and rewinds the scene.
W: "So, do you have any protection?" M "Yeah, of course." W "Amen!"
Boy Angel: (to Girl Angel) "You're kinda hot?"
In response, the girl angel uses the remote to turn him off and make him disappear.
Final Screen: Safe is Sexy Planned Parenthood Golden Gate Appointments: 1-800-230-PLAN PPGG.ORG
As you can see in the image below from Planned Parenthood Golden Gate's 2005 annual report, 53% of the revenue taken in by that chapter of Planned Parenthood's national organization came from "government fees and contracts." Even assuming those dollars went directly to services, that frees up donor money for making porny, Christian-bashing condom sales pitches for underage teens.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America has received over a half-billiion in taxpayer funds in the past two years alone. That money is fungible; it enables the organization to spend more money on public-relations efforts like "A Superhero for Choice," as well as on abortions. If you do not want to see your tax dollars go towards such examples of Planned Parenthood's so-called "comprehensive sexual education," contact your senator or your representative.
I just heard the good news that Barbara McGuigan quoted extensively from The Thrill of the Chaste on the April 10 edition of EWTN's "Open Line" radio show. Haven't yet had a chance to listen to the show, but it's available online.
Giving a book to EWTN's Raymond Arroyo, an extraordinarily gracious man, who was there signing his Mother Angelica biography and his latest, Mother Angelica's Life Lessons.
Meeting U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (with Arroyo in the background). He is a man of great integrity. I admired him before; I admire him even more having met him.
It also impressed me that he made it a point to buy my book, when I was all set to give him a copy; that's a sure way to an author's heart.
The most challenging part of book-signing: finding a writing surface.
Just thought I'd remind y'all of the latest tour dates — if you're in the neighborhood, do come by!
April 17 Talk and signing, Hilary's in Horrigan Hall, Bellarmine University, Louisville, Ky., 7 p.m. Sponsored by Catholic Students Association and Generation JPII.
April 19 Talk and signing, Theology on Tap — Cincinnati; Tickets Sports Cafe, 100 W. Sixth St., Covington, Ky., across from Mother of God Church (ample parking at the church), 7:30 p.m.
April 25 Panel discussion, "All About Sexual Morality," with Monsignor William Smith; Rectory, St. Paul the Apostle. 415 West 59th St. in Manhattan. Copies of my book will be available for sale and signing.
Just got back from a whirlwind trip to Manchester, N.H., where I got to speak and sign books at the Barnes & Noble, make some new friends, and stay at the most beautiful place I've yet stayed during the never-ending book tour. Because Courtney, the legally blonde young woman who booked my talk (and who, like Elle Woods, drafts bills at her day job), volunteers at the St. Joseph Cathedral, she got permission for me to stay in the rectory — where Father Joe Cooper, who has the gift of hospitality, assigned me the bishop's suite.
It's true; I got to stay where Bishop McCormack stays when he's in Manchester. Little me, "one-year-old" Catholic! What a country!
OK, I know you want to see what it looks like. I only took a couple of pics. Basically, the theme is lots and lots of mahogany. You can see one of the lovely carved bedposts in the background here — which, come to think of it, resembled a chess-piece bishop:
The other noteworthy feature is the gorgeous fireplace. You can just barely see the "dog's-tail" theme along the edge of the hardwood floor, where segments of mahogany contrast with the pine:
The Nightfly finds the connection (see his 9:00 p.m. listing in the linked entry). I'd like to think the archbishop would have laughed at Nightfly's characterization of him in a recent comment as "St. Nosferatu."
Had a truly wonderful time signing The Thrill of the Chaste at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast yesterday morning, where I got to meet many great people I'd only known from reputation or long-distance friendship — the latter including American Life League communications director David Brandao, above. David is a longtime Dawn Patrol reader — that's how ALL heard of Planned Parenthood's notorious "A Superhero for Choice" video, among other things.
I also had the great pleasure of meeting Rep. Chris Smith (a very gracious man who insisted on buying my book rather than taking a free copy), the magnetic Father Frank Pavone, John-Henry Westen of LifeSiteNews (who interviewed me about my conversion — look for that on his site next week), Devout Life's Hilary (whose mother needs prayers — see her blog), Raymond Arroyo, Robert Novak, and many others.
I did not, however, get much sleep on the trip, so I must ask your leave, most likely until late tomorrow night — when I return from New Hampshire. Would be grateful for your prayers as I keep up this tight work/tour/work/tour schedule — thanks!
Sorry to hear Kurt Vonnegut has left us. He was one of my favorite authors when I was a kid. Can't say I agree with much of his philosophy these days, but I still have a soft spot for him. I remember how gentle and gracious he was when I recognized him on Eighth Street in the Village one Saturday afternoon when I was 14 as well as another time when he spoke at a Heinrich Boll memorial in the basement of my NYU dorm (both times, I requested and received a hug). I have one other clear memory of him at the Boll event, which I might share when I'm back from touring.
I'm going to be a little busy with touring over the next couple of weeks, so please pardon me if I don't post as often as usual. A listing of my upcoming tour dates follows. I always love meeting Dawn Patrol readers, so I hope you can make it. If you already own a copy of my book, please bring it and I'll gladly sign it; there's no need to buy a new one (but don't let me stop you either). All events are free except the prayer breakfast.
April 12 (tonight!) Talk and signing: Saint Mary's Parish Center, Greenwich, Connecticut. 7:30 p.m.
April 13 Signing, National Catholic Prayer Breakfast, Hilton Washington, D.C. I'll be signing copies of my book in the main ballroom, immediately after the breakfast and before talks by the Rev. Richard John Neuhaus and Scott Hahn. Please say hi to me early, because I'll have to rush off to work!
April 14 Talk and signing, Barnes & Noble, 1741 South Willow Street, Manchester, N.H., 4 p.m.
April 17 Talk and signing, Hilary's in Horrigan Hall, Bellarmine University, Louisville, Ky., 7 p.m. Sponsored by Catholic Students Association and Generation JPII.
April 19 Talk and signing, Theology on Tap — Cincinnati; Tickets Sports Cafe, 100 W. Sixth St., Covington, Ky., across from Mother of God Church (ample parking at the church), 7:30 p.m.
April 25 Panel discussion, "All About Sexual Morality," with Monsignor William Smith; Rectory, St. Paul the Apostle. 415 West 59th St. in Manhattan. Copies of my book will be available for sale and signing.
If you'd like to learn more about my book, the First Things review is now online. Also, if you haven't already read the great story Elizabeth Kelly wrote about me, where I talk about my childhood and my conversion, do check it out. More articles are linked in the Press section of thrillofthechaste.com.
Tonight is a homecoming of sorts, as I return to my alma mater, New York University (B.S. Communications, '89), to participate in a student-alumni roundtable.
My NYU experience led to my conversion to Christianity and eventual Catholicism, though not in the way my professors would have hoped.
In the fall of 1994, I was in my first semester of graduate school at NYU's redundantly named School of Education, majoring in — brace yourself — environmental-conservation education.
With the CD-reissue boom gone bust, my liner-note-writing assignments were drying up, so I was returning to higher-ed after a five-year absence with the aim of getting a degree that would help me get a "real job." Being that I was a good liberal with a nagging idea that I should try to make the world a better place, I chose environmental-conservation education with the aim of becoming a publicist for a group like the Natural Resource Defense Council, where I had interned in college.
In truth, I hadn't the slightest interest in environmental issues, but my sister seemed to like her job as an agricultural economist. (Sis is now a rabbi.) Plus, as a depressed loner, I was attracted to the idea of helping the Earth without having to reach out and help actual people. (My depression would be healed upon my conversion; shedding my loner status is a work in progress.)
One of the core courses for my major was in philosophies of nature. Taught by the department's heads, Thomas Colwell and Millard Clements, it purported to show how various world religions' views affected humankind's treatment of the environment.
At the time I took the course, I was a confirmed agnostic. I did have a certain respect for the Reform Judaism in which I was raised, and also respected Christianity, as my mother had converted when I was a teen and I had seen the overall positive effect of her faith on her life. However, when it came to rating various religions' beliefs, I didn't think I had a dog in that fight — any faith that was nonoppressive was OK by me.
As the course progressed, I became uneasy with the professors' teaching methods. Colwell and Clements used what I have since discovered is the common propaganda method used by liberals seeking to discredit Judeo-Christianity: When they wanted to demonstrate a "good" religion's views on the environment, they would have us read original source material, such as the Tao Te Ching, or texts from Native American mythologies. When they wanted to demonstrate the "bad" views of Judaism and Christianity, they had us read chapters from a book whose author cherry-picked Bible quotes and framed them within the author's critical commentary.
The professors' technique was so obviously propagandistic that it stirred the rebel in me. I started to phone my mother after class and ask her questions like, "Does the Bible's concept of dominion really mean that man can do whatever he wants?"
Mom pointed me to the reams of verses about responsible stewardship, such as God's instructions to the Jews on giving the land a "sabbath." I would then bring up those verses in class — and the professors could barely disguise their disdain.
Another aspect of the course that led me to question my universalistic views was learning for the first time about relativism. Colwell and Clements outlined relativism as the central philosophy upon which the environmental-conservation movement rested. They taught it as truth (as did, I would discover, the other professors in their department).
It seemed obvious to me that if relativism were truth, then relativism could not be true, as relativism teaches there is no absolute truth. Likewise, if relativism were true, then it seemed obvious that one could do whatever one pleased to the Earth, since conservation was no longer an absolute good. Again I raised my voice in class, and again I became the bane of my professors. That really bothered me, as I wanted to do well in school and couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was necessary to subscribe to relativism in order to be a good environmentalist.
A year later, as a grad-school dropout, I was conducting a phone interview with Sugarplastic lead singer Ben Eshbach when I asked the musician what he was currently reading. He replied, "The Man Who Was Thursday, by G.K. Chesterton."
I subsequently bought the book, expecting some P.G. Wodehouse kind of thing [warning: spoilers ahead]. Instead, I was broadsided by the novel's stunning assault upon relativism. Chesterton, who was writing in 1907, did not mention the philosophy by name, but it was instantly recognizable to me in the pronouncements of the novel's anarchist villain.
The book was centered around a philosophy of nature, but one far more radical than anything I'd heard from my aged lefty lecturers. Its Deity-like figure, Sunday, stood for, as Chesterton put it in an interview, "Nature as distinguished from God. Huge, boisterous, full of vitality, dancing with a hundred legs, bright with the glare of the sun, and at first sight, somewhat regardless of us and our desires. There is a phrase used at the end, spoken by Sunday: 'Can ye drink from the cup that I drink of?' which seems to mean that Sunday is God. That is the only serious note in the book; the face of Sunday changes, you tear off the mask of Nature and you find God."
What was most affecting to me at the time, suffering from depression as I was, was the book's treatment of the problem of evil. It was a problem that my professors had refused even to acknowledge beyond their criticisms of Judeo-Christianity's treatment of the environment, which they termed not evil but "destructive."
The novel's protagonist, Gabriel Syme, observes that the perplexing and elusive Sunday looks frightening from the back and lovable from the front. "[T]hat has been for me the mystery of Sunday," he says, "and it is also the mystery of the world. When I see the horrible back, I am sure the noble face is but a mask. When I see the face but for an instant, I know the back is only a jest. Bad is so bad, that we cannot but think good an accident; good is so good, that we feel certain that evil could be explained."
Reading that today, it reminds me of Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen's likening of the course of one's life to a tapestry that we see as God weaves it — but only from behind. That is, in fact, how tapestries are woven, Sheen said — the weaving is done from the back. Seen from behind, it can look messy and ugly, with no meaning or purpose. Yet, from God's side, it is a coherent picture and can be a work of great beauty — one which we will be able to finally see when, God willing, we are in heaven.
So, in a way, I owe everything to NYU — not for what it taught me, but for how it showed me that the truths offered by mainstream academics were sorely lacking in Truth.
Had a positively wonderful time at my talk last night for a crowd of over 100 at Theology on Tap on Manhattan's East Side. I can't recommend the event highly enough. Great organizers, great crowd, great venue — a speaker's delight.
One of the best parts for me was getting to meet people afterward and hear their reactions to my talk. When I'm onstage, apart from the benefit of hearing people laugh at my jokes, I can't usually tell how things are going. This is especially true at times like last night, when I departed at length from my prepared talk and spoke directly from my heart. My heart is not as articulate as I would like, which is a real challenge when describing concepts related to chastity that are difficult to lay out in the first place. So, not knowing how I had come across, I was especially thankful that a number of people told me afterwards that my words had touched them. That's what makes it all worthwhile for me.
A nice bonus was the news from the Theology on Tap organizers that I sold more books — all right, one more — than Father Richard John Neuhaus did when he kicked off this year's lecture series. Ha! (On the other hand, he, unlike me, can claim the distinction of having completed writing his conversion story.
I was also very happy to see some familiar faces, including the famous Joey McKeown[link contains obscenities], Charles DeBost, who helps organize the Emmanuel Community's Tuesday-evening Adoration at St. Malachy's, Matthew Alderman from Holy Whapping (who has a fine article in this month's Touchstone, and Father Luke Sweeney (sans cape).
And it was a treat to meet Father Richard Gill of Regnum Christi, who won my heart immediately by giving me what would become my first laugh line of the evening. He said I should let the audience know that he would be hearing confessions in the back during my talk, and that, in light of my subject matter, he would be giving special "easy penances" on the sixth and ninth commandments.
It only occurred to me much later that, when making the announcement, I could have added he wasn't playing with a full Decalogue, but there you go.
Many thanks to everyone from Theology on Tap and to chastity educator Grace Abruzzo, whom I had the pleasure of meeting at the event and who, I learned, had recommended me to the organizers.
* * *
A Theology on Tap attendee — I don't know his identity — has already blogged about my talk:
The last thing I wanted to hear about was chastity, when I headed for Theology on Tap tonight. However, Dawn manages to dignify it and even make sound attractive. Why? Because it's the truth. And the truth is beautiful.
All I really wanted was to go out and shoot the breeze and have a couple of beers. I stayed in spite of myself, and wound up buying the book. You would too.
No, it didn't hurt that the Yankees were playing, and that it was televised. ...[Read the whole thing.]
* * *
Check the Appearances page on thrillofthechaste.com for details on my talks this week in Greenwich, Conn., and Manchester, N.H. I'm also doing a signing at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in Washington this Friday, and I'll be in Louisville, Ky., and at the Cincinnati Theology on Tap next week (details coming soon).
File under Things We Never Thought We'd See — a clip of a certain beloved songwriter from 1965, years before she was famous. Hang in there, because the beautiful Miss Anderson — not the name by which she's best known —warbles an unreleased tune of her own at about 1:35:
The amazing thing is that, here it is 1965, and her talent appears fully formed. She's like no one else around her. I'm not even a fan of hers and I am in awe.
P.S. I never before noticed that she bears a slight resemblance to Yeoman Rand.
At a time when Christians are called to unite themselves with the risen Lord, it helps to remember that when we become like Him, we shall not only be changed, we shall be chaste.
It's also why chastity is for the married as well as the unmarried, because it is not defined by the avoidance of sex, but rather the understanding of sex as a means of making a mutual gift of one's full, loving presence — which can be a true gift only if it is never taken back.
For the unmarried, practicing chastity reminds us that, while engaging in sex within marriage is one way of experiencing the gift of presence, the gift itself is not bound by
, by G.K. Chesterton."