More realistic Christmas Carols

Merry Christmas!  I hope everyone is enjoying this joyous season.   

One aspect I love about the holiday season is the singing.  However, I have to admit that it bothers me how unrealistic Christmas carols are.  They paint some romanticized picture of Jesus’ birth wherein Mary does not break stride or even a sweat to deliver her baby.  They conjure images that are absent the various bodily fluids or physical sensations of human childbirth.  Yet, many Christmas homilies will emphasize the very important theological facet of Jesus being fully human.  Why then do we sing songs that omit the human realities of birth and go so far as to paint a false picture of what it was like for Jesus to be born a human child?

The lyrics to Silent Night were written by Josephus Mohr, an Austrian priest.  Let us pause for a moment to estimate how many priests throughout history have witnessed human childbirth from labor to delivery.  Let us also estimate how many current Catholic hierarchy members have ever seen the inside of a delivery room.  Were we counting on our fingers, we wouldn't need to use both hands, possibly not even all five fingers of one hand.  Suddenly, the propagation of unrealistic, romanticized, sanitized lyrics of Christmas carols becomes clear.

Let’s also pause a moment to offer some contextual information regarding childbirth since some folks reading this might also be unfamiliar with the realities of childbirth.

• Bloody bodily fluids flow abundantly … to the point that many a modern day father who attends their child’s delivery must sit lest they faint from the shocking sight.
• Contractions produce varying amounts of discomfort from mildly intense pain to what is called “back labor” where the child’s head is turned where its skull scrapes along the mother’s backbone with every contraction.
• When the mother begins pushing for the ultimate delivery of the child’s head, it is called “bearing down.”  This carries similar involuntary intensity as having an urgent yet constipated bowel movement only it lasts much longer.  It is of small wonder that during this process, some mothers have a bowel movement which covers the child as it is being delivered.
• Most women delivering their first child will experience vaginal tearing; their flesh will rip open, sometimes all the way to the anal wall.  In modern times and medical facilities, this can easily be repaired with numerous stitches that will make sitting and performing excretory functions extremely uncomfortable for several days but prevent the mother from bleeding to death.  However, in Jesus’ time, this along with other common complications are what made childbirth a leading killer of women.
• The baby emerges covered in blood and a waxy substance
• Nursing a child for the first time is very painful for most women.  Though the little darling you just delivered is toothless, he/she has very hard gums and chomps down on the mother’s nipples with gusto.  Many mothers will bruise on their nipples, something they likely never knew was possible.
• Though now some of the pains associated with childbirth can be dulled, Mary did not have the benefit of these pharmaceutical marvels.

Instead of portraying these realities of the mess, pain and danger of childbirth, Christmas carols draw imagery of Mary without her veil or possibly dress ever moving out of place.  They also fail to acknowledge the physical danger into which God placed Mary by impregnating her whilst being betrothed.  In her times, betrothals occurred often when girls were quite young followed by fully consummated marriage around age of 14 or so.  Betrothal was a strong commitment as sort of a non-consummated marriage and a woman found to be pregnant by someone other than her betrothed was considered guilty of committing adultery, an offense punishable by stoning. 

As an aside, I find myself contemplating possible connections between birth control and abortion, and fixations on the Annunciation story where an angel tells the Virgin Mary she’s going to be overshadowed by the Holy Spirit which will impregnate her.  The story is often preached as Mary saying “yes” but if you read the actual scriptural text, there is no question presented to Mary.  The angel says, “this is gonna happen.”  Mary agrees but that does not seem to matter.  Her body is going to be exploited for reproduction regardless of her consent.  Herein seems to lie a foundational element of theology objectifying women by viewing them primarily as passive receptive vessels for bearing children.

Pope Francis’ annual Vatican Curia Christmas excoriation this year included his wishes for increased respect for women.  That needs to include revisiting and correcting centuries old theology which objectifies women as mere tools of reproduction.  It also needs to include stopping the dehumanizing propagation of unrealistic understandings of women’s key experiences such as childbirth.  Therefore, I decided it was a timely moment to write more realistic lyrics for a few songs associated with Advent and Christmas.  I hope you enjoy them.

Immaculate Mary II (to the tune of “Immaculate Mary”) – a song sung during Advent, especially for the Feasts of Our Lady of Gaudalupe and the Immaculate Conception

Immaculate Mary, your praises we sing

But they want women docile so turned you into a wimpy thing

Ave, Ave, Ave Maria. Ave Ave Maria

You got impregnated while you were betrothed

Though you knew you’d be stone if ever exposed

Ave, Ave, Ave Maria. Ave, Ave Maria

But you’ve been reduced to a dainty little vessel

Despite being tough as a mortar and pestel

Ave, Ave, Ave Maria. Ave, Ave Maria

“Stressful Long Night” (to the tune of “Silent Night”)

Stressful long night, holy night

Push baby out with all of your might

Vaginal tearing to thy anal wall

Lots of pain with no Demerol

Pleas for this pain to cease; Pleas for this pain to cease

Stressful long night, holy night

Shepherds quake at the sight

Blood just streams as if hacked with an axe

Holy Infant covered in blood and wax

Christ the Savior is born; Christ the Savior is born.

Stressful long night, holy night

Son of God nurses with a bite

Radiant pain from chest to bottom

Shooting pains you previously did not fathom

Jesus Lord at thy birth; Jesus Lord at thy birth

“Away in a Stable” (to the tune of “Away in a Manger”)

Away in a stable, no hospital bed

Mary labors ‘mongst critters instead

The stars in the sky are the only light

By which to deliver her baby that night

The cattle are lowing and wafting their smells

But who really notices as Mary yells

She squats and bears down and out comes some dung

Along with the baby from her which is sprung

Be near her Lord Jesus, I ask you to stay

To re-humanize her and aptly portray

Your mom as a person of strong grittiness

And not a docile vessel who simply said “yes.”

A day that will live in irony...

75 years ago yesterday, Franklin Roosevelt said it was a “date which will live in infamy.”  However, yesterday in Catholic hierarchy land was a day which will live in irony.  Here are a few highlights:

• The Vatican began its first organization for female workers in the Vatican.  
• Pope Francis begged media outlets to be responsible and not spread disinformation.
• The Vatican updated its guidelines for priestly formation.

Since it first emerged in the 15^th and 16^th centuries, the Vatican never had an organization for female employees – a group currently numbering around 750 or 20% of the Vatican population.  I’ve not found many details on the new organization’s activities but I suspect they do not include grooming women for executive positions in the Vatican.  In general, women are not groomed for anything in the church other than obedience and servitude.

However, boys and men willing to consider the priesthood merit volumes of guidelines, programs and efforts to support their development.  The latest in the lot was published yesterday. 

Reading the updated priest formation guidelines kind of reinforces my sneaking suspicion about the Vatican’s women’s organization lacking executive leadership development.  The document is a masterpiece of self-admiration for clergy calling themselves “diamonds” and emphasizing how grateful we all should be that priests are better than other humans.  It is a truly bizarre document feigning humility whilst reeking of hierarchical arrogance.  It scorns clericalism but is so very clerical itself.  It says priests should be shepherds that smell like sheep but then extols priests hanging out with other priests.  It says priests should learn how to interact with women but then suggests myriads of clerical figures to help, etc.... 

Meanwhile, Pope Francis, who leads an organization which sometimes makes stuff up and declares it “truth,” appeals to media outlets not to spread misinformation or disinformation.  He thinks the media shouldn’t just make things up and pass them off as factual news. 

Though I agree that spreading disinformation is reprehensible, I found the pope’s plea rather ironic.  I can provide a litany of examples where hierarchy members spread disinformation…from various hierarchy members’ lies covering up for abusive priests, to rejecting scientific understandings about human physiology and psychology, to pretending women were never ordained as deacons though they were for centuries, to made-up “facts” about women and their roles, to a September, 2015 US bishops’ smear campaign which propagated false news that a US social service organization sold aborted baby parts. 

However, the pope’s disinformation concerns carry exceptionally exquisite irony due to his timing expressing them…the day before the Feast of the Immaculate Conception…a feast day honoring a doctrinal belief spun from pure myth yet one of the two beliefs the Catholic hierarchy declares absolutely infallible.  The Assumption of Mary, the other doctrine declared infallible, equally rests upon a mountain of myth. 

Maybe the pope would be more at ease if the various fake or shoddy news outlets declared themselves infallible?  Or maybe the pope doesn’t like news outlets competing with clergy for making shit up?  Perhaps the pope is ok with the hierarchy telling what my mother used to call “pious fairy tales” because he thinks they are happy and positive but fake news stories are downers?  Maybe he’s ok with clergy playing fast and loose with facts if it leads to reinforcing some happy myth the hierarchy wishes to promote?  I don’t know. 

Pope Francis also speaks about a sickness in the media feeding people’s desire for scandal.  I agree some media outlets feed some people’s attraction to scandal but some news organizations practice what is called “good investigative journalism.”  For example, Marty Baron, current editor of the Washington Post and former editor of the Boston Globe who guided that paper to investigate the extensive abuse scandal in the Boston Archdiocese, should be canonized as a living saint, not portrayed as a sinner feeding people’s fetish for scandal.  The Globe’s hundreds of stories shed much needed light on a very dark corner of the church.  Thank you. 

Francis also commented that some media sources seem to never let scandal die.  I agree with him that one should not indefinitely live under a shroud for past sins.  However, I also believe that if we do not remember and discuss candidly the facts surrounding unfortunate historical situations, we are destined to repeat them. 

Francis provided no specific examples regarding unrelenting fixation on scandalous stories.  Ironically, one of the shoddy news sites – a favorite amongst many US Catholic clergy – must have used its mind-reading abilities or just made shit up to say that Francis obviously referred to excavating stories about US President-elect Donald Trump.  However, Francis actually stated that scandals should be relinquished after penance and restitution.  I’m uncertain if penance or restitution have occurred for any of those scandals.  Alas, I digress.

It is ironic too that many Catholic hierarchy frequent some fake news sites though Francis condemns such sites.  It is ironic but not surprising.  There is a high degree of alcoholism amongst the clergy and alcoholics live dishonesty to a point they normalize it in their lives.  About 50% of priests are sexually active and thus live dishonest lives regarding sexuality and relationships…again normalizing dishonesty within their lives.  Many priests will teach things they do not believe but do so to remain in good standing with the church…again normalizing dishonesty within their lives.  Maybe this is why I personally have not found the clergy to be any more truthful than any other demographic group.   A few have actually turned out to rank amongst the most dishonest, unscrupulous people I’ve ever encountered.   

Yet, the clergy formation document tells us they are “diamonds.”  Well, the saying is “diamonds are a girl’s best friend” and the clergy formation document does say priests need to learn to be friendly with women because they are the majority within parishes…after 2,000 years they figured it out!  However, it kind of discusses women as though they are unique non-human creatures so it’s hard to see us becoming “besties.”  Reading the clergy formation guidelines’ description of women, I felt a little like a wild creature that Marlin Perkins of “Wild Kingdom” might have discussed…”here we see the female human operating in her natural habitat…notice how she….”  

Kudos for realizing most priests do not work well with women.  However, in the litany of human resources to teach future priests how to work with women, we mostly find richly diverse categories of priests…folks who ya just said don’t tend to work well with women.  Isn’t that like having an anti-Semite teach Jewish culture appreciation classes to other anti-Semites to help them be less anti-Semitic?

Anyway, from the three topics we see:   

1) Priests need to work better with women and thus should entrench themselves amongst clergy to learn how to do this.   

2) As part of the “we love women” campaign, women in the Vatican can have a club.   

3) Don’t make shit up and spread it around unless you are ordained.  

 4) If you are ordained, you’re a diamond and we all know diamonds don’t shit. 

Just a side thought…could they mean priests are diamonds as in hard, impenetrable entities that are expensive to keep and merely glittery ornaments? 

Saudi Arabia 20, Vatican 0

Dear Pope Francis,

This will be short and sweet.  Saudi Arabia just elected 20 women, which is 20 more than ever in the Catholic Church.  So, I find myself in a position asking you and your brotherhood to consider learning something from the Saudis on sharing power with women.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/12/13/world/middleeast/ap-ml-saudi-women-vote.html

Hope you are having a transformative Advent. 

Love and prayers as always,

The Ewe

Francis, poor women need your help

I don't write for many weeks and then I have articles on back to back days.  The timing of today's article is inspired by an email I received this morning from the Michigan Catholic Conference (MCC), the lobbying organization for the Catholic bishops of Michigan.  

As background to readers from outside the U.S., there is an effort afoot to end US federal funding for a group called Planned Parenthood.  This organization is one of the primary women's healthcare providers for poor women in the U.S.   3% of their services are abortion and by law they cannot use federal funds for abortions.  The majority of their services are related to women's reproductive care and the New England Journal of Medicine attributes the organization's family planning services with actually reducing the number of abortions.

However, there are extremists who oppose abortion that undertook a smear campaign, falsifying videos and accusing the organization of trafficking aborted baby bodies.  Now they seek to defund the organization completely.

At the encouragement of my father, below is a response I emailed moments ago to my bishop and his communication director. For context I also include the note I received from the communication director encouraging me to contact my elected officials asking them to vote to defund this organization. Maybe people would like to contact their representative and express their own opinion on this issue.  The link to a response form is included in the note from the diocese.  However, it appears that if you use it, your message first goes to the MCC.  I think I will just directly communicate with my rep.

All I can say is, Francis, poor women need your help...

My Response:

Dear Mike and Bp Earl,

I send you warm greetings this beautiful day.  However, I do need to comment on this note I received from Mike.

The content of this note fanning flames around videos known to have fabricated and false evidence is unacceptable behavior from an organization that says it is not only a staunch defender of truth but the ultimate defender of truth.  You are not credible guardians of truth if you do not tell it. I expect more from you as leaders.  Please expect more from yourselves too.

If you cannot achieve your objectives via strict adherence to facts, then perhaps you drive your agenda vs God's?  

Here is a link for fact checking about Planned Parenthood. 

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/. 

As you can see, federal funds cannot be used for an abortion at Planned Parenthood.  Thus, your argument seems empty.

Furthermore, abortion constitutes about 3% of Planned Parenthood services.  Why are you fixated on defunding Planned Parenthood completely?  Why do you wish to defund the primary source of female healthcare services for poor women?  What is your proposed alternative to offer them care?  Please do elaborate.  I am interested in your solutions advocating for poor women, especially on the cusp of a visit from Pope Francis who cares so deeply, passionately and tenderly for the poor.  In the absence of offering an alternative healthcare option for poor women, it is difficult to see this as anything other than a sexist, misogynist move veiled in moral concern.

Your priorities confuse me greatly and I know church leaders worry a great deal about not causing confusion.  Therefore I know you will want to consider this confusion you inspire.  The federal budget includes well over $500 Billion for military.  The Planned Parenthood federal funding is roughly around $500 Million.  It would seem to me, as Christians representing the Prince of Peace, you would exert 1,000 times more effort and outrage at 1,000 times more funding going to the military than towards healthcare services for poor women.

By the way, the New England Journal of Medicine attributes Planned Parenthood, not strident Catholic organizations working feverishly spreading misinformation, as a key reason abortion rates have dropped in the U.S.  This is due to their family planning services.  http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe1510281.  Please see the end of paragraph 2.

I wish you the peace of Christ, the wisdom of the Spirit and the love of God.

The original email from the MCC:

The Michigan Catholic Conference has just sent out the message below via the Bishops' Catholic Advocacy Network.  Please follow the link at the end of the message to contact your U.S. Representative.
 

Legislation is expected to come before the U.S. House of Representatives this week that would eliminate federal funding for Planned Parenthood of America and its affiliates. Planned Parenthood receives over half a billion taxpayer dollars a year and performs over a third of all abortions around the United States. Recently, a number of undercover videos show officials from the organization willing to participate in the trafficking of fetal organs and tissue, as well as to alter the abortion procedure to obtain more "intact" parts. Taxpayer dollars should not be supporting an organization with these practices.

In particular, House Resolution 3134 places a moratorium on funding for Planned Parenthood for one year and is on the agenda for the House Rules Committee this Wednesday evening. A vote of the full House is expected shortly thereafter.

Take a few minutes now to let your U.S. Representative know that H.R. 3134 and similar legislation such as H.R. 3301 should be adopted into law. Thank you in advance for your efforts on behalf of the unborn.

Michigan Catholic Conference

Click the link below to log in and send your message:
https://www.votervoice.net/BroadcastLinks/DxRp4hLruiYPjLGaShMDWQ 
 

The Vatican acts...

I have been remiss in not acknowledging the Pontifical Council on Culture’s change in artwork for its outline document on women’s culture.  Without fanfare, explanation or apology, the council switched the cover art a few weeks ago.   We may never know what swayed the seemingly recalcitrant Pontifical Council leader, Cardinal Ravasi…  Was it the uber-orthodoxy’s concerns about female nudity or those expressed about female bondage conveyed by Man Ray’s “Venus Restored,” their original cover art choice, that tipped the scales?

I waited to write about this because I’m still uncertain if the new artwork is an improvement or not.  Instead of a nude, headless woman’s torso in ropes, the report cover now sports Petrus Christus’ 15^th century painting, “Our Lady of the Dry Tree.”  Yes, it is now the Virgin Mary…the clergy’s default, prevalent, unrealistic image of women.  Instead of celebrating the councils’ action, I shook my head and sighed at the predictability: women were first portrayed as naked “T & A” and then as the Virgin Mary.

Many if not most clergy imprison themselves to seeing women as either a virgin or a whore with no middle ground in how they identify women.  Therefore, I’m not surprised that their mental limitation manifested itself in their art choices.  Should we call it a “win” that they didn’t leap to the Marian image first?

However, their mental limitations also manifested themselves via their writings.  The council’s working document speaks about the body as a key factor in one’s identity.  It continues by describing feminine identity thusly: “So the feminine identity is the point of convergence of daily fragility, of vulnerability, mutability and multiplicity between emotive interior life and exterior physicality.”

Putting this in everyday language, the council believes that feminine identity is a combination of being fragile (on a daily basis), being vulnerable, being changeable, and being varied … all intermingled between internal emotions and external physical appearance.  I’m not sure if using less academic language helps in the statement’s understandability.  But it perhaps helps one determine if the statement reflects a convergence of the clergy’s daily misogyny, pseudo-chivalry, immutability, and hegemony harbored in their interior thoughts and manifested in their exterior actions more than it describes feminine identity.

Let’s start with “daily fragility.”  What exactly is that?  The definition of “fragile” is “easily destroyed; not strong or sturdy; vulnerable.”  I don’t know what women the council members interact with, but regardless of poverty or wealth, sickness or health, most women I know possess and exhibit tremendous strength and grit.  To portray women as egg-shell thin porcelain dolls constantly on the brink of being smashed to smithereens…every single day…perhaps projects how the council members wish women were but does not reflect who they actually are.  Aha…now we’re getting somewhere with regards to women’s identity.  It’s not what council members desire it to be and they can’t unfetter themselves from being enslaved to their own ideas long enough to confront truth.

“Vulnerable” is a synonym for “fragile” so I have to deduct points for redundancy, repetition and saying the same thing more than once.

Not sure where the council was going with the “mutability” angle.  Yes women change over time…as do men…but it’s not like women are the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or anything.  Oh, that’s right; we couldn’t be because the TMNT are kick-ass crime-fighters not dainty little teacups that need to be packed in bubble-wrap. 

Maybe the council was thinking more “go-go Gadget” kind of mutability but alas he’s a guy so that’s doubtful.  From the report the only noteworthy physical change for women is plastic surgery…not puberty, not menstruation, not menopause, not pregnancy.  These are perennial clergy favorites so they really caught me off guard with the plastic surgery thing.

Tip of the hat on “multiplicity.”  However, I’d appreciate if the Catholic hierarchy (and its cheerleaders) would stop trying to shoe-horn all women into the same mould.  That's kind of anti-multiplicity.  Other than including the word “multiplicity” this document did little to break from centuries old stereotypes that hinder the variance implied by “multiplicity.”

Here’s the thing, and granted I’m a woman and thus ineligible to be a member of this august group of men pontificating about women.  Nonetheless, I’m very capable of telling you about my identity.  Why?  Because the bodily component that most influences my identity is not my uterus, not my breasts, not my hair, not my face. It is my brain…you know that biological entity that you completely did not mention in your section about women’s biology.

Newsflash: the average human female uterus is about 102 cubic centimeters and weighs about 200 grams (about .44 ounces) while the average human female brain is about 1130 cubic centimeters and weighs about 1.5 kg (about 3.3 lbs).  I’m trying to figure out why you think ½ pound of flesh should influence my identity more than something in my body that is 7.5 times larger.

So, no, my identity is not my naked torso; It’s not the inner organs housed by my naked torso; it’s not me scrambling to be the Virgin Mary; it's not me sitting in a dry tree; it’s not a frail frightened little bunny; it’s not even that of Leonardo, Michelangelo, Donatello, Rafael of TMNT fame, or Inspector Gadget.  My identity is quite simply this.  I am a child of God, endowed with many gifts and a functioning brain, who walks with God, and walks as God not the hierarchy sees fit.  I am equal to – no better or worse than – any other child of God and my possibilities should not be limited by humans.  The fact that the church hierarchy limits or tries to limit my possibilities is something for it to address within its ranks.  And as long as the hierarchy continues to limit women’s possibilities, I am called to assert my non-fragile self upon their hegemonic praxes to reject what is insupportable within Christianity.  That is my identity and you are welcome to include it as an addendum to your little report.