Beth and Traci: The Church’s Ovaries
There we were, back in the saddle or more accurately back in a basement church room with a bunch of earnest Christ-loving broads but in this case a portrait of the pope. Two hours of Why Catholic?—“a unique adult faith formation process solidly based on Sacred Scripture, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and updated to include citations from the newly published United States Catholic Catechism for Adults.” The group leader told us that “the program is book-driven, but we don’t use the book very much.” Renegades. Cool. I can relate: This one time, in high school, I totally missed curfew so I could finish watching My Fair Lady with my friend’s mom. True story. And if God didn’t want me to stay out till midnight, he shouldn’t have made Audrey Hepburn so enchanting as Eliza Doolittle.
Back to the basement room: The elements I’ve grown accustomed to were there, like the “us against the secular world” line of chatter, which from where I’m sitting with the cohorts in my teeny minority sounds dubious at best, and speaking of dubious, has anybody else heard that Karl Rove is an agnostic? Not that I want to claim him, but the irony of his nonbelief adds a new layer of evil to his program of Christian manipulation, does it not? Hypocrisy, I mean, just so we’re clear.
Part of the Why Catholic? program’s goals, in my estimation, is to arm Catholics for discussions about religion, and if in those discussions “there’s a winner and a loser, then you’ve both lost,” the group leader told us. I’m hip to that. Fine, fine. The leader herself seemed quite thinky and educated. The meeting was philosophical in a way many of the other groups we’ve been to haven’t been.
Talk turned to that old saw about obeying one’s husband, which sure seems to get a lot of church lady panties in a bunch. I’ve heard significant discussion in our travels about this one, mostly defenses screeching, “But it doesn’t really mean obey.” I have no idea what it means and really don’t care but think the churchies doth protest too much. Just skip over it, like you do with the parts about reserving judgment or using a razor.
Less than 10 women strong, the group kept up its hearty spirit and quick-moving discussion, which at one point progressed in this direction: “If I clean the toilet thoroughly, if I keep the floors clean, God will bless my efforts. He will give me time—to come here or to take a bath at night.”
Hey, whatever gets you through the chore list.
The speaker went on, “When I get flustered, it’s because God is not my focus.” I think I get the heart of this. There’s much to be said for meditation and for keeping one’s priorities in mind. I don’t see any reason to bring a superbeing into it, but whatever.
Reading from the little book of Why Catholic? Talk of sacraments, of putting God first, of Christ “pitching his tent in this world.” (Ahem.) Reprimand to all of us for “trying to be God.” Something about being yeast—of being a good example for the rest of the misbehaving world—“Five little grains make the whole ball of dough rise.” More reading, something about men being called to the priesthood, and . . .
“I always had a hard time with women not being priests. I wanted to know why they couldn’t, but I finally read something that made sense to me, that made it all clear—something I can explain to my kids: The church is the female and Christ is the male, and you can’t have a female marrying the church.”
Wha? Putting aside the heterosexual-only marriage issue, you’re telling me that anthropomorphizing the church as a female makes sense to you? Pasting a figurative set of ovaries onto the altar seriously clears everything up?
Why wouldn’t it, I guess. Church as womb is so much more logical than historical context.
More protesting too much, this time about the requirement that priests be celibate. (“It really isn’t that weird. They’re chaste to the church like a married person is chaste to a spouse.” Possible loophole, Fathers: Frottage with the church structure. I hear it’s a woman.)
Discussion about what makes a good priest led to the ultimate irony: “Would he make a good husband and father? That’s the kind of priest we need.”
And the end, the part where I always bolt for the door after thanking the ladies who in every case surprise me by being so welcoming, acting so convincingly like there’s nothing weird about two women taking notes while they carry on their churchy business, nothing at all unusual about the atheist at the table.
Like always, there was this, from one of the women to me: “I hope you find the holy spirit.”
Yes, yes, I know: The sentiment is intended kindly. But is meaning well enough? Inherent in a wish that I find God is the message that my beliefs are untenable. The statement is disrespectful of my philosophy and assumes a gaping hole where I am whole. How would it go over if I expressed my version of that sentiment to the group before I left? If I wished out loud for the thing I earnestly believe would benefit them and the world?
“I hope you all stop centering your lives around a fantasy.”
Comment by: Beth Bates
1 05/27/08 4:35 PM | Comment Link |You devastate me with your talent, my friend. (In a good way.)
Wow. That’s some of the best writing and most incisive insights of the entire series. I dunno - stop while we’re ahead? Move on?
Thoughts, anyone? Opinions?
I’m proud of you, Traci. I love you.
Comment by: Amy
2 05/27/08 5:09 PM | Comment Link |Traci, you crack me up! I thoroughly enjoyed this entry. As an almost-Catholic-again Christian who regularly attends mass, I really liked your advice to “just skip over it” like we do so many other parts. Why not?
Another thought - maybe they feel it’s OK for them to “hope” out loud what they do for you (even though you find it offensive - and understandably so) because you’ve put yourself in the position of visiting them on their turf with the purpose of listening to them talk about their faith. I think that makes those kinds of remarks OK; whereas, if one approached you at a block party or at one of your kids’ functions and made that statement, it really would be offensive. Fair?
Comment by: Traci
3 05/27/08 5:52 PM | Comment Link |I can see where you’re coming from, Amy, but I’m skeptical: I mean, if I take a class on deviant behavior, does that mean I want to have sex with your dog?
I say this woman’s comment, although probably innocent in origin, is icky in any context other than after my coming to her and saying, “I’m looking for the holy spirit.” It makes too many assumptions.
I wouldn’t walk up to a fat woman and say, “I hope you get into a size 6.” Not even if I saw her in the gym. Skinny jeans just might not be on her agenda.
But I do go on. I’m glad you threw that thought out there.
Thanks for the props, Beth dear. Much love back to you.
Comment by: Amy
4 05/27/08 9:05 PM | Comment Link |Well, I don’t know about the deviant behavior and what you’d want, but I don’t think that’s really a fair analogy. You really do want to know what these women are thinking (or you probably wouldn’t be doing this project) - and they told you. However, I also think it’s rude for them to assume they have it all and you want it. So I’m talking out both sides of my mouth too.
Comment by: Benjamin
5 05/27/08 10:32 PM | Comment Link |So what if you are attending a class on deviant behavior led and attended by a bunch of deviant swingers? Then is it fair for you to expect not to be propositioned?
I had to look up “frottage”. Thanks for that.
Maybe finding the Holy spirit could be a good thing. I’m thinking of the lyrics to Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah,
He sings:
But maybe that’s not what the nice catholic lady meant.
Comment by: Helen
6 05/28/08 4:42 AM | Comment Link |Thanks Traci - as funny, insightful and incisive as ever :).
I loved this
Ironic, yes, isn’t it just?
If they were right and those ladies were truly in a minority in the world, you could probably get away with it because most people would agree with you that it’s a noble sentiment.
Since they are in the majority, they get away with what they say.
Comment by: Benjamin
7 05/28/08 2:25 PM | Comment Link |My friend Russell said, in response to that,
Comment by: Claudia
8 05/29/08 3:00 PM | Comment Link |Does it make more sense if you remember the (popular) theology’s constructed on a base of goddess-fetishizing paganism? There’s a reason the real hold-out Catholic cultures are all Marian as hell.
There are worse things in the world to worship than ovaries. Or, at least, so say my ovaries.
Comment by: benjamin ady
9 05/30/08 12:09 AM | Comment Link |what is that? It sounds … interesting.
Comment by: Claudia
10 05/30/08 6:32 AM | Comment Link |The long answer.
Comment by: benjamin ady
11 05/30/08 1:15 PM | Comment Link |claudia
Wow–500 pages? That is the long answer.
Plus–it’s the third of three volumes?
Aha–here’s a more accessible synopsis for my lazy, information-age brain. Wow–it looks like all the people from whom everybody quotes all quoted from it.
Hey–look–you seem to have coined a phrase. Google doesn’t (as of 1:12 PM pacific standard time, may 30, 2008) return any results for the exact phrase “goddess fetishizing paganism”. How long do you suppose it will take google to pick up on the phrase in this thread? I’m guessing by tomorrow.
Comment by: Claudia
12 06/3/08 8:03 AM | Comment Link |Much more succinct, Benjamin–thanks!
And Church Rater is now the first and only listing on a search for the phrase. If there’s an onslaught of comments by people named Athena and Raven, you’ll know it’s driving traffic.
Comment by: Elizabeth Chapin
13 06/3/08 11:36 AM | Comment Link |WOW - lol! The title of this blog interested me, as I saw it on the Off the Map web page. Engaging discussion of the church and ovaries here. Traci asks,
Well, it doesn’t make sense to me just because this imagery is used in the Bible. I prefer the idea that in Christ there is no male or female… We’ve spent far too much time elevating our differences instead of celebrating our common humanity.
Comment by: Benjamin
14 06/3/08 3:19 PM | Comment Link |That’s hilarious. That would *so* rock if a bunch of Athena and Ravens started showing up.
Does the ovary think mean the church can get ovarian cancer? (how’s that for making the conversation all heavy all of a sudden?)
Looks like google grabbed it on May 30, less than 2 days after it appeared. That is amazing–when you consider how many web pages there are, and how much new content is generated every day.
Yahoo got it too, although their cache page doesn’t tell us *when* they got it, like Google’s does. And guess which of the top three search engines *still* doesn’t have it =). This is why *nobody* uses them, except all the poor microsoft employees while they’re at work.
Comment by: Athena
15 06/14/08 2:41 PM | Comment Link |This site ROCKS.
Comment by: benjamin ady
16 06/20/08 10:49 PM | Comment Link |Check it out. We got an Athena! You rock! Glad you like the site =)