For too long, sex ed has been male-focused, too vague, or entirely nonexistent. We want to fix that. 

You told us: ‍

It’s so hard to find *female centered* information about sex ‍

‍My sex ed growing up was nonexistent ‍

‍There is so much taboo around female desire‍

I was told all my life that sex was bad, bad, bad. Now that I’m married, how am I supposed to just flip a switch? ‍‍

I have no idea how to communicate my needs during sex to my husband  

I see women being pressured into sex as a service rather than truly desiring each other.. and who feel guilty advocating for themselves  

In marriage prep we learned about how to chart your cycle but not how to actually be intimate

Sex is painful sometimes, and I guess that’s just normal for some women (*it’s not!!!)​‍‍

These are definitely not things I can Google

I need a safe space to ask questions I feel like I should already know the answer to​

To all of you who gave this feedback - you are definitely not alone.

We created this new pilot program for you:

You're Invited to FemCatholic Sex Ed: Honest Conversations for Women, from Women 

🌟 Unlock the Truth About Your God-Given Sexuality 🌟

Our mission is simple but significant: to educate and ignite meaningful conversations among women about sex from a female-centered and values-based perspective.

Explore the FC Sex Ed Expert Video Library featuring 8 modules, ~20 min each:

Get a trusted perspective from FemCatholic experts on topics like:

🚺 Female Anatomy and Common Medical Issues

💬 Identifying Sexual Scripts and Shame

🌟 The Foundations of Female Arousal

🧠 Female Pleasure and Purity: De-Programming from Purity Culture

❤️ Mastering the Art of Effective Communication Regarding Sexual Needs

🩺 Multifaceted Modalities for Managing Pelvic Pain

📅 Addressing Issues with Libido

📢 FREE BONUS: When Women Say Yes: Consent in Sex and Love - Keynote from the 2019 FemCatholic Conference

Featured Experts

Hand selected for you - to speak into the areas of sexuality you said are most challenging, right now. They are professional experts in their field, but are also practicing Catholics who have a passion for women's wellbeing:

🎤 Dr. Julia Sadusky, Licensed Clinical Psychologist with specialties in sex therapy and trauma-informed care

🎤 Dr. Denise Montagnino, OBGYN in both private and academic practice for over 10 years

🎤 Dr. Emily Jurschak, Board-Certified Clinical Specialist in Orthopaedic Physical Therapy and Owner of Fiat Physical Therapy

🎤 Regina Boyd, Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist & Founder of Boyd Counseling Services

🎤 Emily Frase, Founder of TotalWhine and Sex & Family Planning Coach

🎤 Rachael Killackey, Founder & Executive Director of Magdala Ministries where women can find hope, healing, and freedom alongside each other from sexual addiction

Join the Private Forum for Discussion 👥

All members will gain access to our private FC Collective community forum. It's a safe, intimate space to explore these crucial conversations.

Your participation in these intimate conversations is invaluable. Together, we'll bring essential information about women's experiences around sex to light, initiate vital conversations within the Church about women's sexuality, and gather feedback to shape our future programming.

💪 We Know Women Deserve Better Resources

Unlike other resources on sex that fail to provide a holistic and honest female perspective, FemCatholic Sex Ed empowers you with root causes and tangible guidance on how to enjoy sex the way God intended for women.

Whether you are single, dating, or married, FemCatholic connects you with experts and other women like you to access the practical guidance you need.

Join Us Today

Don't miss the opportunity to engage in honest, transformative conversations about sex from experts you can trust.

Join us for FemCatholic Sex Ed as we embark on this empowering journey together - for women, and for the Church.

Watch FC Sex Ed Now Inside FC Collective

Demands for exorcisms are on the rise in the United States. While exact numbers are hard to pinpoint, there are approximately 150 active exorcists working in the US. They receive calls for help from men and women, people of all ages, races, and religions. For those of us who love scary movies, this diversity may come as a surprise. In possession films, victims tend to be young girls whose faces are contorted in evil sneers or – more horrifying still – evil nuns.

Why is this? If you dare, I invite you to follow me on a spooky journey into the possession horror film subgenre, the true stories behind the tropes, and the most terrifying specter of all: The Patriarchy. (Warning: You may have to sleep with the lights on.)

Editor’s Note: Please read with discretion, as this article contains sensitive content.

The Exorcist and The Monstrous Female

“Is there someone inside you?” a psychiatrist famously asks young Regan in the 1973 horror classic The Exorcist. In addition to being terrifying, the question is uncomfortably suggestive, a juxtaposition that foreshadows how Regan’s body is treated throughout the rest of the film.

Although undeniably a masterpiece, The Exorcist cemented virtually all of the genre tropes we recognize today. Its screenwriter, William Blatty, based the screenplay on a true story about a young boy whose exorcism took place at St. Louis University in 1949. Blatty, who was not Catholic, claimed that the story cemented his belief in God. While Blatty never explicitly commented on his decision to change the gender of the victim when writing his film, clues from the movie suggest a distressing explanation: little girls are just scarier.

Feminist film critic Carol Clover coined the phrase “female openness” to describe the concept that “the female body is an open vessel and that, biologically, women are capable of taking objects into their inner space.” Because it is porous, penetrable, and full of slimy mucus, the female body is monstrous.

Throughout The Exorcist, Regan is kept tied down on her back, in bed, with her legs spread. She projectile vomits. She climbs backward down the stairs, her gaping mouth open where her vagina should be. Most infamously, she masturbates with a crucifix, injuring herself in the process. While the devil is nominally the villain, it is Regan’s female body that provides the source of the horror.

Fifty years later, little has changed. The 2023 sequel The Exorcist: Believer might feature an extremely rare Black lead, but both victims are still little girls. (To date, only one possession movie has ever featured a Black victim, the “Blaxploitation” B-movie Abby, now out of print.)

The Exorcism of Emily Rose and The Good Victim

Like its cinematic predecessor, The Exorcism of Emily Rose is loosely based on a true story. Anneliese Michel was born in 1952 to a traditionalist Catholic family. Anneliese’s mother had given birth to her oldest daughter, Martha, out of wedlock and she forced both of her daughters to pray and fast constantly in repentance for this sin. When Martha died at a young age, the full burden of this sinfulness was heaped onto young Anneliese, who was made to sleep on a stone floor. She also contracted several serious diseases, including Scarlet Fever, at a young age.

When, at the age of 16, Anneliese began having blackouts and convulsions, she was diagnosed with grand mal epilepsy. Contemporary articles from The Washington Post reported that “[w]hen, after four years of medical treatment, her condition and mental depression worsened, she and her parents eventually became convinced that demons or the devil possessed her.”

Anneliese was put through a rigorous and terrifying exorcism process, during which she was starved and beaten. Court records state that “Michel ripped the clothes off her body, compulsively performed up to 400 squats a day, crawled under a table and barked like a dog for two days, ate spiders and coal, bit the head off a dead bird and licked her own urine from the floor.” After a whopping 70 exorcism attempts, Anneliese Michel died of dehydration and malnourishment at the age of 23. Two priests were found guilty of negligent manslaughter, but their six-month jail sentences were suspended to probation.

This is, unquestionably, a terrifying story fit for a horror movie, but the 2005 film dispatches the truth entirely in favor of standard tropes. In the movie, there is no question that the possession is real. Emily Rose is the quintessential “good victim.” Innocent and pure, her death is a sacrifice that saves the world. The film sacrifices the real Anneliese’s story in the service of a marketable box-office hit. In this version, the good priest is found innocent. He saved her soul, after all.

Whether or not you believe that Anneliese Michel was really possessed (many do), the sloppy adaptation exemplifies the way in which female suffering is commodified for mass consumption. Fortunately, there is another movie about Annelise. The 2006 German-language thriller Requiem tells a far more nuanced and heartbreaking version of the story. With a stunning performance by Sandra Hüller as the afflicted Michaela, the film is well worth the subtitles.

Nunsploitation and the Exotic Other

As a good friend once asked me, “What’s up with all the possessed nuns?”

So-called “nunsploitation” films – movies featuring nuns in bloody, graphic, or even pornographic contexts – peaked in the 1970s, largely as a means of challenging Catholicism. After Vatican II and the shift away from traditional habits, nuns became a source of perverse fascination. According to film scholar Michelle Pribbernow, “The nun, a rare sight in post-Vatican II U.S. and a symbol of opposition to modernity and women’s liberation is an exotic Other, even when not monstrous, and her strangeness opens her up to use by both sides of the struggle.”

One of the most important and well known nunsploitation films is The Devils (1971). This “tortured masterpiece” is loosely based on real events. Centuries ago, there was a wave of alleged mass possessions in convents, the most well-known of which was the “Loudun Affair” and subsequent witch trial in 1632. After an entire convent succumbed to demonic possession, a priest named Urbain Grandier was found guilty of making a deal with the devil and then executed. However, many historians believe that Grandier’s true crime was angering Church authorities. According to Medium, he “had been allegedly involved with several women and fathered at least one extramarital son, and had advocated against the mandatory celibacy for priests.” He also got into a legal dispute with the local government. Unsurprisingly, most modern scholars attribute the events at Loudun and other convents to mass hysteria, similar to the infamous dancing plagues of the same period. A life of boredom and restriction interrupted only by violence and plague is believed to be the true cause of the chaos – or maybe it was the devil.

Whatever the true story, The Devils depicts the Loudun Affair as a failed attempt at liberation by the nuns, tragically resulting in disaster and graphic death. Pribbernow explains, “The Devils, filmed during second-wave feminism and great cultural attention to women’s sexual liberation, depicts nuns as sexually frustrated women who attempt to use their special social status and vocation to gain attention but are instead used and manipulated by male authorities.”

Although nunsploitation as a genre declined with the rise of “little girl” possession movies, it’s back in a big way with movies such as The Nun (2018) and The Nun II (2023). Although both were critically panned, these additions to The Conjuring cinematic universe were both major box office hits. As long as women – and nuns in particular – are seen as “Other,” nunsploitation films are here to stay.

Can Catholics Watch Scary Movies?

Those of us with a love for the horror genre might feel some degree of tension. From the blatant anti-Catholicism to the violent and sexual images, there’s plenty to argue against viewing horror and especially against watching possession films. (I’d be remiss if I didn’t say that the Church advises strongly against it.)

But despite their tenuous roots in true possession stories, these films are rarely about the demonic. Instead, they reveal something deeper about our society. With a critical eye, a rational mind, and a strong heart, we can identify what is actually taking place in the possession subgenre of horror.

I will never forget the moment when I heard the sound of my timer go off. Three minutes had gone by in a blink of an eye. I took a deep breath before I stood up. My knees were shaking. I felt a cloud of emotions and thoughts fog up my mind. I looked at him; he seemed just as anxious as I was. We walked to the counter together and grabbed the test stick: two pink lines. My heart stopped and my breath was knocked out of me. “We’re pregnant,” he said. He wrapped me in his arms and we began to cry. “We’re pregnant.”

That day was filled with many tears. There were tears of joy, tears of relief, tears from laughter. My heart felt like it might implode. We had waited and prayed and worked so hard to get to this point, to become parents and build our own family. I thought of all of the nights I spent wondering, waiting, and yearning for this day to come. My desire for motherhood had been palpable throughout our relationship, engagement, and marriage.

That day was a moment of pure joy I will never forget. “I’m finally a mother,” I thought. Immediately, I felt a wave of shame and grief. The reality was that this was my husband’s and my first pregnancy, but it was not my first pregnancy.

Facing Miscarriage As an Unmarried Woman

My first pregnancy had happened years earlier, a year before my husband and I met during my senior year of college.

I had spent my first half of college swearing off dating and vowing to never marry. At that point, I had been abused in many ways by many men in my short life. The summer after my sophomore year, in a moment of vulnerability, I was assaulted. My identity had been intrinsically linked to my virginity, as is the case for many young Catholic women. I struggled to find meaning in my suffering and turned to self destruction.

My junior year, I met the man whom I believed would change all of that. We carried each other’s broken hearts with tenderness and kindness. He was the first calm and loving man I had met, so I ignored his demons. We fell in love and I loved him with all that I had at that time; which, in hindsight, was not much. Eight months later, I shared myself with him in a way that I thought could undo what had been done to me, could redeem what had been taken. I would consider this my “first” time.

Five weeks later, I knew something was different within me, though in my naivety I could not believe it. The weight of the possibility of being pregnant was too much. “Not now,” I thought. “I just started living.” For the first time in my life, my period was over a month and a half late. I knew I was avoiding the issue; I thought he noticed, too. My body was changing and the nausea had begun. I could no longer deny it: I told him I thought that I was pregnant, and we cried in each other’s arms. He was happy; I was angry and terrified. He promised to take care of us, to stop drinking, and to work to support us. He told me he would marry me. At that moment, all I could think about was how I wished it could all be over.

A week and a half later, in the middle of the night, I felt a sharp pain I had never felt before and I started to bleed. We went to the OB/GYN hours later, and they confirmed I was miscarrying at almost 7 weeks. The nurse practitioner looked at me and said, “You’re so young and it was so early. We won’t ‘count’ it on your record.”

I sought therapeutic help at my Catholic college. My Catholic counselor told me it would be best if I focused on my own issues rather than something so minor since “most women don’t even know that they’re pregnant that early.”

All that followed were weeks of bleeding, months of denial, and almost a year of silence.

In Pro-Life Catholic Circles, My Miscarriage Was Met With Discomfort and Dismissal

When I started opening up about my miscarriage, I was surprised to find my inner circle of faithful Catholic friends less than empathetic.

I don’t believe it was their intention to approach things in that way. They seemed uncomfortable and unsure of what to say. The issue wasn't that they were scandalized that I had had sex; a few of them weren’t. The issue was that my story was met with responses like,

“Well, God works in mysterious ways.”
“Trust in God’s plan for you. You might not have been able to graduate if the pregnancy had lasted.”
“God in His mercy allowed your child to pass because you weren’t ready. You should thank Him.”
“God knew He had something better in store for your life than being an unwed mother.”

When I began to make friends with married Catholic women – married mothers who had also experienced miscarriages – it made the wound even deeper. There was a tendency to downplay the gravity and depth of my grief, as well as my identity as a mother. In some instances, I was met with dismissals of my miscarriage and the reality of my motherhood as a result of my loss; these left me feeling like my pain should not be as heavy because I “did things the wrong way.” It wasn’t until I got married and moved to bigger cities with Catholic communities made up of converts that I felt my experience was ever validated.

A newer friend of mine had gone through a similar situation, except she was 19 and had gotten pregnant by a 24-year-old in an on-again-off-again relationship. She miscarried at nearly 6 weeks. Her doctor called it a chemical pregnancy and told her to use protection since she is too young to have a mistake ruin her life. She became severely depressed and started seeing a psychiatrist, who put her on several antidepressants and mood stabilizers.

She shared with me that while she saw her friends going to pro-life events, they outwardly judged the young women who clearly had married due to becoming pregnant while on a college campus. She didn’t feel safe telling them what happened until years later. When she did, she was met with the same discomfort and dismissal that I experienced. She had left the Faith largely due to this experience, but now as a married mother of two children, she wanted to find a way back. She told me she was scared that her daughter might experience the same isolation and dismissal she had faced, but she was comforted by our shared experiences.

After Miscarriage, Our Marital Status Shouldn’t Determine Whether We Receive Empathy and Care

I miscarried as an unmarried young woman. Yes, my child was conceived out of a 'sinful' relationship – but my loss matters, too.

The stories we share about our miscarriages are each painful, tragic, and traumatic. Yes, there are differences between each person’s situation. There are differences of context, relationship status, weeks of gestation, etc. But does that change the fact that a child was lost? Does it change the fact that we also grieved – and continue to grieve – the loss of their lives to this day? Is the grief substantially different when the loss results in the discovery of infertility disorders (as mine did), in a loss of hope for the future, or in a loss of the actualization of motherhood?

Not one of our faithful Catholic friends or family members who knew our history wished us a happy Mother’s Day until I became a mother to a child on this side of existence. I know many married Catholic women who have had loss after loss and who experience the same thing. Many of us suffer silently. We grieve our children deeply, in ways only someone who has experienced it themselves can understand.

The tragedy and trauma of losing a child – regardless of whether it is outside of or within marriage – is worthy of empathy and care. When we think about mothers, we think about the sacrifices they make to nourish their child as they live and grow. In truth, women who do not yet have the opportunity of meeting the milestones of motherhood due to miscarriage are still mothers. We carry our children in our hearts for the rest of our lives. You cannot deny the child’s little existence; once they are there, you know. You are irrevocably changed. It happened, your child exists. No matter how long they were within you or beside you, or the context in which they were conceived, their souls are forever in the hands of God and we will meet them again one day. We can hope in this together.

How to Care for Someone Who Has Lost a Child to Miscarriage

October is both Respect Life Month and National Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month. About 10-20% of pregnancies result in miscarriage, so the odds are fairly high that you will befriend a woman who has lost a child due to miscarriage.

For those who struggle to empathize with or care for a friend who lost a child as an unmarried woman: Dealing with someone else’s loss is always a challenge. Especially if you are dealing with pain from your own experience, it can feel hard to “equate” both of these experiences on an emotional level. I invite you to consider that no two experiences are exactly the same, even among married friends. Both losses are, however, equal in light of the dignity of mother and child. They both deserve the utmost care and are worthy of grieving.

For those who have never experienced miscarriage: There might not be much you can relate to in terms of context, but diminishing someone’s experience because the weight of their grief feels too heavy is not the answer.

For those who are looking for ways to support someone you love who has lost a child, I have a few recommendations:

Offer to pray for the child with your friend, or send them a spiritual bouquet and check in often. Ask if you can help arrange a private funeral Mass for the child, or offer a Mass for them on the anniversary of the child’s passing or would-be due date. Buy a keepsake with the child’s chosen name on it so your friend can physically carry the memory of their child.

I encourage you to walk gently with your friends who have suffered this kind of loss; they chose to share this loss and entrust their grieving heart to you, and you have the opportunity to love them in it.

Little Anthony and Faustina, pray for us.

You may have heard (if you’re a Catholic news nerd) that 54 women will be participating as voting members in the Synod on Synodality in Rome this month. Now if you’re thinking, “Okay, back up… What’s a synod? What’s synodality? What’s a voting member? And why does this matter?” – we’re here to help!

What is the Synod on Synodality?

Let’s start with “synod”: It’s an ancient word, one that’s been around since the first centuries of Christianity. In 325 AD, Church bishops started describing their gatherings as synods. “Synod” is from the Greek for “walking together.”

In 1054, the Eastern and Western Churches split and the schism between Eastern and Western Christians made convening bishops a fraught issue. Pope Paul VI brought back the Synod of Bishops in 1965. It was his effort to promote the collegiality and collaboration that many bishops and priests experienced during the Second Vatican Council. His decision emphasized that the Church is not a monarchy or a democracy, it’s a third thing: a synod – a community.

Now for “synodality”: It means the quality of being synod-like, so I guess that translates to “walking-together-ish-ness.” Has a ring to it, right?

And finally, the Synod on Synodality: This is a process that started in 2021 (two years ago!). Pope Francis called the whole Church to operate in a more communal way – to get better at walking together, encountering each other, and listening to one another. After two years of discussions in parishes and dioceses, and across nations and continents, 363 bishops and lay people are gathering from October 4 through 29 in Rome, where they will encounter, listen, and discern what the Church has learned thus far. At the end, they will vote on a document that will guide the next stage of the synod.

Why is This Synod Unique?

Since 1965, when Pope Paul VI brought back the synod of bishops, the synod has met 15 times. What’s unique about this synod is the Vatican’s explicit recognition that women – whose role in leading and bearing the Church’s tradition on their shoulders is undeniable, who make up over 75% of Catholic school teachers and administrators in the U.S., and who make up 54% of Catholics in the U.S. – have been essential in fostering a synodal spirit in their communities.

“From all continents comes an appeal for Catholic women to be valued first and foremost as baptised and equal members of the People of God,” says a compilation document of the global discussions published last fall. “There is almost unanimous affirmation that women love the Church deeply, but many feel sadness because their lives are often not well understood, and their contributions and charisms not always valued.”

This synod, women from all over the world have been making their mark on the synod process and will be representing women’s voices in Rome this month.

We talked with four of them. Allow us to introduce you.

Sr. Nathalie Becquart: General Undersecretary of the Synod on Bishops

Sr. Nathalie Becquart is a synodal icon. She is a sister in the Xaviere Congregation (named after the Society of Jesus co-founder St. Francis Xavier) and the first woman to hold the role of General Undersecretary of the Synod on Bishops. That fancy title means that she’s been helping organize the Synod on Synodality since Pope Francis first announced it on May 21, 2021 – and that she can vote in the synod process.

Sr. Becquart got the call that Pope Francis had appointed her as General Undersecretary after the school year when she was (coincidentally or providentially) studying synodality and ecclesiology at Boston College’s School of Theology and Ministry.

But even before that, when she decided to attend Boston College in 2019, Sr. Becquart had gotten a call from the Vatican, informing her that the pope wanted her to be a consultor to the synod of bishops.

“That was really a deep experience,” said Sr. Becquart in a Zoom interview with FemCatholic. “I had discerned with my superiors and spiritual director this call to research synodality and serve a synodal church. And the fact that I was appointed by Pope Francis was a kind of confirmation of that discernment,” she added.

Her journey toward supporting a synodal Church began with a speech given by Pope Francis in October 2015 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Paul VI’s establishment of the Synod of Bishops. “He stated that the world in which we live now is so fragmented and with so much division, that the path of synodality is the path for the Church in the third millennium,” Sr. Becquart said. His words moved her. “That was the first time I really started to understand the importance of synodality.” 

At the time, she was working for the French bishops supporting youth ministries at the National Office of Evangelization of the Youth. She worked closely with the Office for the Family. Pope Francis convened the Synod on Family in 2014 and 2015, and the Synod on Young People in 2018 – topics that jived perfectly with Sr. Becquart’s work.

“It gave us a great joy,” she said. One of her colleagues in the Office for the Family advised her that good preparation was key to bearing fruit from the Synod. So, Sr. Becquart started to gather people together to prepare for the synod on youth.

This lesson of good preparation is reflected in the process of the Synod on Synodality, which has been a two-year journey of discussion in preparation for the discussion in Rome this month.

Sr. Becquart was asked to give a testimony on the experience of the preparation for the Synod on Young People in France. Instead of reporting on her work alone, she invited the young people she had been working with to present with her. The General Secretary of the synod was there at her testimony and asked her to join in the coordination of the synod in Rome.

“The most consoling experiences in the Church were those in which I have experienced synodality,” Sr. Becquart said. She spoke about her work both with France’s bishops and in her religious order as synodal, a way of journeying together and listening.

World Youth Day, for example, she says is “synodality in action,” even if young people don’t use this word.

At World Youth Day, she said, young people experience a Church that is excited to listen to and encounter the youth. “They see a church of fraternity, unity, diversity… these people coming from so many different backgrounds but being together in communion,” she said. “Once people have this experience, they could recognize, yes, that's synodality. Because it's difficult. You can't understand synodality just with a book or a speech. It's a learning by doing. It's an experience.” 

Sr. Becquart said that the lay and female voting members of the synod will be a witness and reminder of the diversity of the Church. “They're here to remind the pastors [and] to witness to them that you can't be a pastor without journeying closely with the people,” she said. The lay delegates represent the wider Church who are not in the room.

So, how can those who are not in Rome participate in the Synod?

“The first way to participate is to pray,” Becquart says. She suggests looking at the Synod website. Their office has made particular Prayers of the Faithful and prayers before the Eucharist that the bishops will pray throughout the world during the Masses at the opening of the Synod.

She recommends that each person read the working document that synthesizes the many conversations and concerns of the global Church from the past two years. “We have to discern how we will continue to serve the mission of the Church all together, in our world of today,” Sr. Becquart said.

She encourages Catholics to form discussion groups to discern what applies to their church in their local context, and how to operate more communally “There are many, many things you don't need an assembly in Rome [for] to put into practice in your parish,” she said.

The goal of the synod is primarily a spiritual journey, it’s to become a Church that has a style and manner of communion, participation, fraternity: a Church that journeys together as missionary disciples. 

“The journey is not finished,” Sr. Becquart said: “All are invited to come on board.”

Julia Oseka: Representing Young People in the Church

“Young people are the ‘now’ of the Church,” said Julia Oseka, a native of Poland and a physics and theology student at St. Joseph’s University in Philadelphia. Oseka, 22, is the youngest member of the 363 voting delegates – and she is one of 10 lay members from the United States who are invited to the Synod.

Oseka is full of enthusiasm for the synod. She believes that synodality has answered the needs of many of her young peers in the Church. Young people often get called the future of the Church, she said, but the young are actually the present and their lived perspectives can help the Church respond more effectively to the signs of the times. “Calling them ‘the future’ excludes them from having a place at the table right now, today,” she said. She has heard her peers express a desire to be more involved; to be on parish councils and to have more decision-making involvement in a church context.

Oseka said she was “very surprised” when she got an email announcing that she was one of the 10 candidates to attend the synod. She was also grateful, overjoyed, and humbled. “Pope Francis’ invitation to women and young people to be active voting members became incarnate in that moment. It felt like a real responsibility – it still feels like a huge responsibility,” Oseka said in a phone call with FemCatholic.

She first heard about the synod by listening to an interview with Sr. Nathalie Becquart on an episode about synodality by a Jesuit podcast. “She said synodality has the spirit of the coffee date – it’s something anyone can do,” Oseka remembers. And those words captured her deeply, she said. “It’s not a lofty idea, you don’t have to have a theology PhD in order to be understood – it’s really down to the roots of who we are… It’s stripping ourselves of biases and trying our best to love each other and meet each other.”

Oseka became involved with an initiative to engage young adults and college students in synod called Synodality in Catholic Higher Education in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia (SCHEP). SCHEP facilitated listening sessions across college campuses for small groups, choirs, and the broader university community. Oseka describes those listening sessions as “holy space.” “It was such an inclusive space. It happens so rarely you get 100 young people who just want to listen to one another,” she said. At the large archdiocesan gathering in April 2022, she suggested going on coffee dates as a start for synodality. Archbishop Nelson Pérez, who was present, said, “I’ll get a coffee with you.”

She was a delegate for the Continental Assembly in the United States, which met over Zoom and discussed the Document for the Continental Stage, as they worked to create a synthesis to use in Rome this month. One of the paragraphs in this document says:

“The Church faces two related challenges: women remain the majority of those who attend liturgy and participate in activities, men a minority; yet most decision-making and governance roles are held by men. It is clear that the Church must find ways to attract men to a more active membership in the Church and to enable women to participate more fully at all levels of Church life.”

Oseka looks forward to carrying the voices of her peers into these conversations in Rome. “My duty is to carry the voices and experiences of the people who participated in the synod, and also those who were afraid to participate in the synod,” she said. In Rome, she sees herself being an advocate especially for young people, women, and the marginalized. So far, she says, from Archbishop Pérez to Cardinal Mario Grech to other elderly delegates, her experiences as a young person have been met with welcome.

She encourages young people and women to continue talking to one another and to their bishops and church leaders about synodality, about journeying together and listening to one another along the way. Even invite them for a coffee chat, where synodality begins.

Sandra Chaoul: Daring to Encounter Others

Sandra Chaoul, one of the delegates in Rome this month, doesn’t have a background in academic theology. Rather, she has come to understand the concept of synodality through personal experience.

A Maronite Catholic, Chaoul studied economics as an undergraduate at St. Joseph’s University and got her master’s in financial economics at American University in Beirut, both in her hometown of Beirut, Lebanon.

After graduation, she worked in the corporate world. “Synodality was not something I understood back then or even came across as a concept,” she said in an email. 

But, for the past ten years, she has collaborated with the Society of Jesus in Beirut, forming leaders and working with Jesuit initiatives in the country. “My experience of the Ignatian retreat and the Spiritual Exercises has really opened me to the experience that prayer is not just saying words, but rather opening myself to the way God is walking with me as a person,” Chaoul said in a Zoom call with FemCatholic.

But, looking back, she realizes she experienced synodality as common discernment with a community and by “opening spaces of listening and sharing.” Over the past decade, she has learned more about Ignatian spirituality and collaborated more with Jesuits through the Discerning Leadership program, which develops young adult leaders and provides faith formation through retreats, small group prayer, and practicing “spiritual conversations” by sharing desolations, consolations, and listening to others.

She shares this story about her experience of the synod:

“In one of the synodal listening phases I was part of in the Middle East, there was a time dedicated to prayer, where we invited members to take a moment of contemplation before joining their small groups. A few participants, including priests and bishops, spent the biggest part of that time gathered in the hall chatting together, taking calls or responding to emails. I found myself frustrated and discouraged by that.

“The next day, on the bus sitting next to a bishop in our group, I shared in a heart-to-heart, somewhat animated, conversation my disappointment when priests do not respect prayer times and seem resistant to the process. I was very moved by his deep listening and encouragement, and something shifted in me. I noticed how easy it is in these moments to fall into generalizations, to allow resentment or judgment to build up and to get stuck in what is not working, and how this brings a sense of desolation.”

She has found silence to be important for “resetting” after a difficult plenary discussion or disagreement. Silence allows her, she says, to tap into that longing for unity underneath the frustration.

“Women and lay people (especially youth) can bring a prophetic voice, a spontaneity and a freshness that is worth listening to if we are to rediscover what it means to be Church today,” she said. The voices of the discounted and the marginalized are essential for walking together better as a Church.

Chaoul encourages readers to open up a conversation with the local church governance: talk to a priest or a church community, go to a synod listening circle, reach out to someone in the church. “Daring an encounter is key,” she said. “I know it from myself, how easy it is to disconnect when I feel hurt or ignored, and there [have] been a lot of wounds in the Church, so this may not be easy.”

Margaret Karram: Answering the Call to Unity

For Margaret Karram, the president of the Focolare movement, synodality has a personal dimension, in addition to an ecclesiological and a communal one. She has learned a lot about synodality from Focolare, a lay movement that emphasizes unity as a human family. Focolare means “hearth,” and the goal of Focolare is to gather humanity around a common hearth of belonging. 

“The main purpose of Focolare is to live for unity,” said Margaret Karram to FemCatholic. She sees synodality as offering the Church a way of living for and with unity. “This is what humanity is lacking,” Karram said. “Humanity is lacking this togetherness.”

Karram certainly understands division. She and her three siblings grew up in Haifa, a coastal city in Israel/Palestine that is majority Jewish Israeli but has the second-largest Christian Arab population in Israel/Palestine. Haifa is a “mixed-city” according to the Israeli census, but faces many tensions, divisions, separations, and prejudices among its members.

At the age of 14, Karram discovered Chiara Lubich, the founder of Focolare, and her call to unity based on the famous passage from the Gospel of John: “that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you.” She understood that the call of the Gospel wasn’t only personal or spiritual conversion. “The Gospel can transform our own life and can bring a social revolution,” she said.

She hopes the synod on synodality helps men and women all over the world feel part of “a big family where fraternal relationships can be experienced concretely… where you are part of a mosaic where every piece is important.”

Focolare focuses on ecumenism and interreligious dialogue as part of its mission of unity. She has seen Focolare members all over the world bring this dimension to the synod’s goal of “walking together.” She has seen members include in listening sessions Christians from other churches, people of other religions, and also agnostics.

“For me, walking together means walking with Jesus among us,” she said, comparing synodality to the Road to Emmaus story. “We are on the journey with Jesus. He is the only one that can make the Church more beautiful and that can transform the Church and transform our societies,” she said.

Karram has been the president of the Focolare Movement since 2021, and so she lives in Italy, where the movement is headquartered. She participated in the Continental Assembly for Europe that took place this spring in Prague. 

They gathered together in plenary sessions and small working groups, and they discussed the working documents through prayer together, silence, and listening to one another. “It was in an effort to leave room for the action of the Holy Spirit,” she said. She found it a touching experience. “I saw that the Church is like a mother that really respects everyone and there is room for everyone,” Karram said.

As the third president of one of the world’s largest lay ecclesial movements, Karram understands the importance of the laity, who are – as she points out – the majority of Catholics in the world. She also understands the specific gifts of women. Chiara Lubich stipulated that a woman must always be the president of the Focolare movement.‍

“It seems to me that it is not about roles but rather about creating the opportunities where we women can better give our specific contribution to the Church,” she said.

Karram noted that Pope Francis is also welcoming women into positions of responsibility in the institutional Church. Women now make up around 22% of the Vatican employees. 

“I prefer to emphasize the gift that the Church can perceive when the presence of women is more consciously recognized and valued,” Karram said. She notes that she was born in the Galilee, the land of Mary. “I believe there is still much for us to learn from the greatest woman in history – Mary,” she said. Mary, the model for all Christians, is not just a model for women. Valuing the contributions of women is essential for all of us to walk together in unity as a Church and a world. Karram believes that this synodal path of unity is the way forward.

“I believe we can contribute to a more authentic and beautiful Church that opens her arms to the whole humanity.”

Learning to See Women’s Gifts as Truly Necessary

Women participating in the synodal processes desire both Church and society to be a place of flourishing, active participation, and healthy belonging.

Some reports note that the cultures of their countries have made progress in the inclusion and participation of women, progress that could serve as a model for the Church. Others note that there is still a long way to go toward valuing women’s gifts and seeing them as necessary, not just as a nice add-on. 

“This lack of equality for women within the Church is seen as a stumbling block for the Church in the modern world,” said a report from New Zealand in the 2022 compilation document.

As Sr. Nathalie Becquart and other synod leaders remind the Church, the work of gathering everyone together, of enlarging the space of the tent we gather under, and of considering who we see as an essential part of that is far from done.

‍“The journey isn’t finished,” Sr. Becquart said. “All are invited to come on board, all are invited to be part of the synodal Church. Everybody has a role.”

When Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022, many considered it to be a huge victory for the pro-life movement. Yet, recent data shows that abortions have continued to rise, suggesting that we still have a long way to go in making our country a place that is truly welcoming to new life and supportive of the mothers who bear it into the world

It’s no secret that the United States can be a difficult place to be pregnant and raise a child, especially for those with fewer resources. There are a myriad of hurdles that new parents face: a lack of federally mandated paid parental leave, exorbitant hospital bills that can be difficult to pay under our insurance system, the rising cost of already expensive childcare, and a startling maternal mortality rate, especially for Black women. These are all massive, crucial issues that must be addressed if we are to more fully welcoming to new life.

In this (very much non-exhaustive) list, I hope to highlight a few related, but lesser-known, policies and procedures that make it more difficult for women to welcome life and to bond with their new babies.

1. Women in prison are sometimes forced to give birth in chains, and are often separated from their babies after 24 hours.

The United States has the highest rate of incarceration of women in the world, and many women are subjected to sexual abuse while in prison. A 2014 federal investigation found that more than a third of the staff at the Julia Tutwiler Prison for Women in Alabama – the subject of a recent FRONTLINE documentary about pregnant inmates – had sex with inmates. According to the Pregnancy in Prison Statistics Project, about 58,000 pregnant women are admitted to jails or prisons each year, and thousands of those women give birth while still incarcerated.

The treatment of these women varies, depending on which prison they are in. Thirty-seven states have passed laws that forbid the shackling of women while in labor and delivery, and in 2018 the federal First Step Act included a provision that prohibited the use of restraints on pregnant women in custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service. But the laws that do exist still make exceptions for “public safety,” and in practice, a 2018 survey of nurses who had cared for incarcerated pregnant women found that 82% of those nurses reported that their patients were shackled at least some of the time. The medical community widely opposes this practice because it interferes with the care they are able to provide birthing women.

Another crucial issue with the treatment of incarcerated pregnant women is how quickly they are separated from their babies. Most women only have 24 hours with their baby before being separated and sent back to prison, a practice that can cause severe emotional and behavioral problems in later life for children. Due to the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) that requires states to terminate parental rights to children who have been in foster care for 15 of the last 24 months, this separation sometimes becomes lifelong.

What can we do for incarcerated pregnant women?

There are a few innovative programs that are reaching out to incarcerated pregnant women to provide education and support. Examples include the Minnesota Doula Project and the Alabama Prison Birth Project, which provide doula support to pregnant inmates. Some prisons have started providing lactation rooms to promote breastfeeding, where women can go to pump milk that is sent to their babies. Some states provide prison-based nursery programs that house mothers and their newborns in special units, and Massachusetts allows mothers to keep their infants with them for up to 24 months in correctional residential programs in the community. Advocating for these programs to be more widespread – or being trained as a doula if you live in a state where these exist – would be a big step forward.

Because of the high percentage of women who are incarcerated on drug-related charges, finding ways to treat addiction is also crucial. According to the PIPS Project, there are an estimated 8,000 admissions of pregnant women with opioid use disorder into prisons and jails each year, but long-term treatment using medication is still uncommon.

As one mother in the Tutwiler documentary poignantly said, “A lot of us have been abused our entire lives. And we enter into relationships of abuse, and then DHR [Alabama Department of Human Resources] wants to step in and say we can’t have our children because they’re going to enter into relationships of abuse. Well, help us, you know? Don’t just throw us off into prison or take our children. Actually help us.”

2. Pregnant teens in foster care are often separated from their children because there is no one willing to care for them together.

Teens in foster care are twice as likely to become pregnant as their peers, and 11 times more likely to lose custody of their child within the first week of life. In order for them to stay together, they must find a foster home that agrees to take in both the mother and the baby, which is uncommon. If that does not happen, they are placed in separate foster homes. This separation, as previously noted, is detrimental to the baby’s development, and also creates additional trauma for the teen, who has likely already had a fair share.

What can we do for pregnant or parenting teens in foster care?

One big step would be becoming a foster parent who is willing to house pregnant teens, and both mother and baby after birth.

We can also donate to organizations that are working to support youth in foster care, and advocate for more programs that are specifically designed to serve pregnant and parenting youth in foster care. St. Anne’s in Los Angeles offers one such program, which aims to keep mothers and babies together while providing services to help mothers heal from trauma, transition to adulthood, and keep their children safe and healthy.

3. A mother cannot apply for child support until after a baby is born. 

Pro-choice advocates have fairly pointed out the hypocrisy of this, because if we are going to acknowledge that a baby is a person from the moment of conception, that means a father is a father from that moment, as well.

Pregnant women face many additional financial burdens, from the cost of prenatal care and nutrition to the hospital bills for giving birth, but right now there is no guarantee that the father of the child they are carrying will be legally required to assist with those costs.

What can we do about child support laws?

Advocate for Congress to pass the recently proposed bills that work to address this issue. These include the Providing for Life Act, which includes incentives for states to establish rules requiring the father to cover half of a woman’s pregnancy costs and strengthens child support enforcement. Similarly, Unborn Child Support Act would require states to apply child support obligations to the time period during pregnancy.

4. Closures of maternity wards in low-income areas are creating “maternity deserts.”

The New York Times recently reported on the trend of hospitals deciding to close their maternity wards when they run into financial stress. This is particularly the case in low-income communities, where there is no financial gain in providing those services since Medicaid does not pay hospitals as well as private insurers do.

While this happens in cities like Washington D.C., the trend that The New York Times was noticing is particular to rural and tribal communities. According to one study in Louisiana, women living in these “maternity desserts” are three times more likely to die during pregnancy or during the year after giving birth.

What can we do to alleviate “maternity deserts”?

We can support organizations that specifically reach out to the underserved populations who are most impacted by these closures, such as the Ttáwaxt Birth Justice Center on the Yakama Nation Reservation, which provides women with pre- and post-natal care that is based in Native culture. Another example includes Abide Women’s Health Services in Dallas, Texas, which works to combat the disparities in Black maternal and infant health. We can also hold Catholic hospitals accountable when they choose to close maternity wards in underserved communities.

5. Many pregnant college students do not know their rights under Title IX.

While Title IX guarantees women equal access to education, there is no guarantee that those rights are communicated to students or faculty.

Currently, the Department of Education only recommends – but does not require – that schools “make clear that prohibited sex discrimination covers discrimination against pregnant and parenting students.” As a result, many students still lack the resources needed to practically carry a pregnancy to term. Plus, once a child is born, the majority of residence halls do not allow children in them, which means that students can have a difficult time finding housing (and childcare) while they are in classes.

Catholic colleges are not immune to this issue. As FemCatholic reported in 2022, only 16 of the 29 Catholic colleges who responded to us (we reached out to 180) said that they were aware of at least one pregnant student on their campus in the past year. Of course, that does not mean that pregnancies are not occurring – only that the students who do become pregnant likely drop out before telling anyone, choose to end the pregnancy, or struggle through the journey of being a pregnant and parenting college student without accessing the resources available to them.

What can we do for pregnant and parenting college students?

There are some policies in the works – or which were recently passed – that have aimed to address this issue.

In Texas, two bills went into effect on September 1: Senate Bill 412 enshrined federal protections for pregnant women and parenting college students into Texas state law, and Senate Bill 459 offered priority class registration for parenting college students.

On a national level, proposed updates to Title IX passed by the Biden administration include a requirement that any employee of the school who learns of a student's pregnancy must provide them with information about how to contact the Title IX Coordinator, who must then provide the student with information about a voluntary leave of absence with reinstatement of academic status; a clean, private space for lactation; and other available resources to prevent discrimination. In addition, the previously mentioned Providing for Life Act includes the “Pregnant Students' Rights Act” which requires schools to ensure expecting moms are told about all of the resources available to them.

On a school by school basis, there are some programs out there that we can support and also advocate for expansion to other colleges.

One example at a secular university is the Baby Steps program at Auburn University, which provides housing, support, and community for pregnant and parenting students. The organization is currently raising money to start a program at the University of Alabama, as well. Two Catholic schools with similar longstanding programs are the College of St. Mary in Nebraska and MiraVia residence on the campus of Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina.

‍

The extensive list of difficulties facing women and families in our country can feel daunting, and I know I often have a hard time knowing where to start when I want to help. I hope that this list can provide a few ideas of concrete ways to advocate for greater justice and to donate our time or money to organizations that are committed to helping women welcome new life.

In a culture that claims to be sexually liberated, many women struggle to talk honestly about their sex lives. There is pressure to exaggerate positive sexual experiences, as well as embarrassment around sexual struggles. In Christian circles, talking about sex can often feel shameful, even for married women. While there is a wealth of information available regarding how to achieve or avoid pregnancy, accurate information about achieving a full and satisfying sex life is woefully difficult to find. This is why it’s so important to talk openly about sex with trusted friends. As uncomfortable as it might be at first, there is a wealth of wisdom available to us through other women.‍

“What lubricants are conception-safe?”
“Is it bad if I usually don’t have an orgasm?”
“What kind of foreplay is allowed by the Church?”
“What sex positions work with a curved penis?”

These were just a few of the questions that emerged from a cardboard shoe box covered in pink and purple glitter. The “Question Box” is by far the best thing I’ve ever done at a bachelorette party, surpassing even the mechanical bull on 6th Street in downtown Austin.

The decorated shoebox sat unobtrusively on the kitchen counter next to a stack of notecards. Throughout the day, anyone was welcome to discreetly drop an anonymous question about sex into the box. Later that night, while enjoying a bottle of sparkling wine, we read the questions out loud, one by one, and tried to answer them as a group.

Some of the questions were funny, some were medical in nature, and some were genuinely thought-provoking. There was something almost sacred about a group of women coming together to share wisdom in a safe and supportive environment. It made me wonder why we don’t do this more often.

So, if you’d like to have a candid conversation with your female friends about sex, here are a few key guidelines:

1. Respect Boundaries

There will always be aspects of intimate relationships that are kept between husband and wife. Honest conversations about sex aren’t gossip columns or Cosmo cover stories. They don’t need to be salacious or obscene.

Different women will naturally have different levels of comfort when it comes to sharing personal details about their sex lives. Especially in Christian circles, it’s likely that this will be the first time that some women have shared anything about their intimate relationships. Don’t let curiosity tempt you into pressing for further details aside from what is absolutely necessary. And – this is essential – absolutely anything said in confidence needs to be kept in confidence. Make yourself worthy of your friends’ trust.

It’s also important to keep in mind the other party in any sexual relationship. Men are entitled to privacy and respect, as is everyone. Conversations that devolve into personal criticisms or even mocking of husbands aren’t healthy, kind, or empowering. A fruitful conversation isn’t only geared toward female bonding, but also toward stronger marriages and improved intimate relationships.

2. Be Intentional

Talking about sex can be awkward, especially for women who have been told for most of their lives that doing so is inappropriate. When starting a conversation with your friends, it can be tempting to wait until a moment when it “feels natural,” and then attempt to talk spontaneously. But this runs the risk of catching people off guard, which can lead to embarrassment and shutting down.

What worked so well about the “Question Box” was that it allowed everyone to warm up to the idea of having a conversation about sex. We had time to think about the questions we wanted to ask, and then we created a safe and comfortable environment in which to ask them.

Let your friends know that you would like to start a conversation about sex, and pick a suitable time and place to do so. A girls’ night at someone’s house, for example, is probably more appropriate than a restaurant or bar. Come to the conversation with a few of your own thoughts and questions already prepared, and set the tone for a respectful and vulnerable conversation. If you show that you are open, your friends will be more comfortable to open up, as well.

3. Normalize, Normalize, Normalize

No matter what topics are brought up in a conversation about sex, the most important thing is for women to know that they are not alone.

Many women who were raised in purity culture find themselves surprised by the nitty-gritty reality of sex. Others who experienced exposure to pornography may be surprised to learn just how difficult it can be to experience sexual pleasure.

No matter what the situation, assuring your friends that what they are going through is, in fact, extremely common can go a long way toward lifting the burden.

3. Follow Up

Once the first conversation has taken place, talking about sex will be easier and more natural. Hopefully, you can get to a point with your friends where it is appropriate to bring up sex within a casual conversation.

If you know a friend is struggling with a particularly difficult sexual issue, it’s good to follow up. This may be as simple as, “Hey, how are things going with that issue we talked about?” or “Did you ever visit that pelvic floor physical therapist I recommended?”

A one-and-done conversation is rarely enough to counteract a lifetime of embarrassment or shameful feelings around sexuality. Little by little though, these barriers can fall away. By keeping the lines of communication open, you can create a lasting support system and let your friends know that you really care.

4. Have Fun

Conversations about sex are going to evoke giggles. They’re going to result in a few shocked silences and a little nervous laughter. Allow this to happen.

As long as no one is being laughed at, embrace whatever emotions come up. This doesn’t have to be a deathly serious experience. It can – and should – be fun. Talking about sex will bring you closer to your friends and root you more in your femininity. There is joy in discovering ourselves more deeply, with respect and candor.

So go ahead and pour yourself a cocktail, light a candle, and bring out the snacks. It’s time for a little girl talk.

St. Teresa of Calcutta may be one of the most recognizable saints in modern history. Known worldwide as Mother Teresa, her dedication to serving the poor and the marginalized gained her international recognition, while her kind smile and prayerful presence marked her early on as someone who was close to God. Her holiness was so well known that her cause for sainthood was opened only two years after her death in 1997, accelerating the regular 5 year waiting period. However, when her private writings were published in 2007, in the book Come Be My Light, Mother Teresa’s complex interior life was revealed. While it is impossible to know for sure what Mother Teresa suffered, her story brings to light questions about the relationship between faith and mental health.

How Can We Tell the Difference Between Spiritual and Psychological Suffering?

Underneath her countenance of radiant light, Mother Teresa suffered from a sense of spiritual separation from God, an experience that stayed with her for decades. Many see her experience as a purely spiritual one, described as what St. John of the Cross called the “dark night of the soul.” Others view her experience through a psychological lens, postulating that she might have suffered from depression.

According to Beth Hlabse, a counselor and program director for the Fiat Program on Faith and Mental Health at Notre Dame, “the dynamic is complex.” She explained, “It would be a false fragmentation, however, if we failed to recognize the spiritual and psychological present in both experiences. We’re an integral unity of body-soul; hence, the Lord is present with us in depression in a manner which for many is not unlike the ‘dark night,’ in that it’s hard to perceive His presence.”

In order to distinguish between the two, Hlabse puts the primacy on experience. “The question of distinction is often asked by those trying to discern whether their experience – or the experience of someone they care for – is one or the other.”

Where Does Mental Illness Come From?

In a passage from Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus tells His disciples, “For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is life not more than food, and the body more than clothing?”

At first glance, it would seem that Jesus is commanding us to choose to not be anxious. However, for those with a mental illness, making that choice is not so simple. Hlabse explained that the emergence of mental illness, as with many other physical illnesses, begins with certain genetic predispositions.

In her words, “The predominant theory to explain the emergence of mental illness is that of epigenetics, meaning that all people have certain genetic vulnerabilities to disease and illness.” However, these vulnerabilities aren’t the end of the story. Hlabse said, “Whether or not these genes are expressed (versus remaining dormant) is a function of the amount of stress placed on our person – primarily our nervous system – through our environment and development. Hence, it’s not nature or nurture; it’s both.”

Perhaps the most prevalent of these stressors have to do with our relationships. Hlabse explained that relationship is one of our most basic needs, and what’s more, “we never mature out of these needs.” This need for relationship is not only psychological, but also spiritual. We were, at our most basic level, created for it. As Hlabse put it, “To be made in God’s image and likeness means to be created in the image of God, who is Love, who is perfect Relationship: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”

However, with the introduction of original sin, human relationship became fractured, meaning that this need of ours could no longer be met fully. Hlabse calls this fracturing our “original woundedness.” She said, “Today, we still long for communion, but we live in the reverberating effects of original sin, of our fractured relationships, and we continue to sin – to wound our relationships.”

This loss of connection also plays a part in the expression of mental illness. Hlabse said, “If we consider original woundedness and its reverberating effects – together with the theory of epigenetics – we behold the reality of why we still hurt, despite all our technological progress as people.”

Is Mental Illness My Fault?

The reality of both the beauty of the relationship we were made for and the hurt we experience when it’s broken is expressed acutely in the Psalms. Jesus Himself used the Psalms to express His profound suffering on the Cross, exclaiming the beginning of Psalm 22: “My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?” Even though He was sinless, Jesus felt a kind of separation from God, His Father, which He chose to express using the words of Scripture.

While describing the various factors that predispose someone to mental illness, Hlabse concluded that, like with any illness, “Perhaps, most simply, we can remember that mental illness is not the result of a personal or familial deficit.” Jesus said something similar in an encounter with a blind man. In the Gospel of John, it says, “As he passed by he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’ Jesus answered, ‘Neither he nor his parents sinned; it is so that the works of God might be made visible through him.’” Jesus declared that bodily illness is not the result of someone’s moral weakness or a consequence for their sins, but rather an opportunity for God to show His glory.

Not only does Jesus proclaim that the man’s illness is not the result of a personal failing, but He further proclaims that the man is worthy of healing. John’s Gospel continues, “When [Jesus] had said this, he spat on the ground and made clay with the saliva, and smeared the clay on his eyes, and said to him, ‘Go wash in the Pool of Siloam’ (which means Sent). So he went and washed, and came back able to see.” Jesus offered the blind man a personal, intimate connection that — when accepted by the man — resulted in his physical healing.

This healing, in turn, helped restore the blind man’s relationship with God. After the man was thrown out of the temple for calling Jesus a prophet, Jesus sought him out and asked him, “‘Do you believe in the Son of Man?’ He answered and said, 'Who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?’ Jesus said to him, 'You have seen Him and the one speaking with you is He.’ [The man] said, ‘I do believe, Lord,’ and he worshiped him.” As the man’s physical health was restored, so too was the even deeper wound of his fractured relationship with God.

Does God Want to Heal Mental Illness?

Hlabse explained that Jesus offers the same healing to us, providing physical and spiritual avenues to restore those with mental illness.

The first of these avenues is written into our biology. Hlabse said, “Across the board, persons’ experience of illness – their capacity to experience interior freedom amidst chronic diagnoses – changes. This is reflected neurobiologically through neuroplasticity (the change of our neural architecture over time).” With the help of a counselor and good tools, a person with mental illness can start to alleviate symptoms and suffering through retraining the brain.

Hlabse also stressed the importance of relationships in this process. “Neuroscience helps us to understand that relationships are centrally important to the neuroplastic change that supports our living a meaningful life amidst symptoms. The ‘relationship’ with a therapist should bear fruit in helping us cultivate healthier relationships within our families and communities.” The support of family, friends, and other loved ones is critical for encouraging the brain to heal and the suffering individual to find peace.

Another place where those suffering with mental illness can find relationship and healing is in the Church. Hlabse said, “Our faith also upholds a vision of healing, which includes but is not limited to miraculous cure – the remission of symptoms. Our Catholic faith tradition understands healing as the restoration of the communion that was fractured with original sin, and from this communion, new fruit is born. There is not just recovery but transformation.”

For Hlabse, the Eucharist is a primary source for restoring relationship. She explained, “As I prepare to receive the Eucharist, I uplift my wounds and illness – and the wounds and illness of those I love – praying for the restoration of communion.” By embracing the sacraments and spending time with Jesus in prayer, our need for relationship can be fulfilled as God intended it to be from the beginning.

We Should Embrace Faith and Science When Healing from Mental Illness

How, then, can we understand Jesus’ command to “not be anxious” in light of the rest of Scripture and the reality of mental illness?

Hlabse responded to this question by remarking, “As people, we cannot prevent worry or anxiety or another form of mental illness. We are vulnerable to it – by nature of original sin and epigenetics – and we cannot become invulnerable. Our Lord is asking us to respond to our worry, our anxiety, our illness through a posture of trust.”

She went on to reiterate that this trust happens through embracing both faith and science. “Our Lord is inviting us still to utilize these resources, but at once to trust ultimately in Him. No technology nor scientific finding can eradicate fully our vulnerability to illness. . . .Our Lord reminds us that the ultimate horizon is communion with Him, Love itself.”

Hlabse concluded our interview by offering Psalm 139 as a source of support for anyone suffering from a mental illness, saying, “In the midst of mental illness, we can feel as though our illness is all of us, consuming our identity because of the way mental illness impacts our self perception – and that it is determinative of our future. Neither is true. The psalm reminds us of our ultimate identity as God’s beloved, created in, through, and for Love. It teaches us that ‘even the darkness is not dark for [God].’”

The “abortion pill” has come under fire over the past year, in both the courts and the media. The two sides of the proverbial aisle paint this drug with contradictory characters, either championing it as perfectly safe or condemning it as practically deadly. In the middle of this competing rhetoric, we’re losing key information about what the “abortion pill” is, leading to situations where women are critically underserved or, at times, even in danger. But if we look past the rhetoric to understand the nuance surrounding this medication, we can paint a more accurate picture of the “abortion pill” and provide better care for women.

What Is the “Abortion Pill”?

Despite the name, the “abortion pill” is normally not a single medication; it is typically administered as a set of two medications, taken in series. The first pill is mifepristone and the second is misoprostol.

Mifepristone acts as a progesterone receptor antagonist, meaning that it blocks the effects of progesterone, a critical hormone for maintaining pregnancy. Mifepristone also induces other effects, including increased uterine contractions and death in decidual tissues, which make up part of the placenta.

Misoprostol, which is taken after mifepristone, further induces contractions to remove uterine contents. Misoprostol may also be taken as a single medication, though this is less common.

Discussions around abortion and “abortion pill” regulation typically center on mifepristone because the FDA approved it specifically as an abortifacient in 2000. In contrast, misoprostol was originally approved in 1988 for prevention of gastric ulcers. Because of this, misoprostol does not have the same legal requirements for regulation, although patients may receive questions at the pharmacy about reasons for use.

Due to the legal complexity surrounding it, mifepristone will be the focus of this article.

Mifepristone’s Political Status Limits its Accessibility for Women Suffering Miscarriage

Just as the phrase “abortion pill” inaccurately describes the two-medication regimen, it also does not fully encompass mifepristone’s clinical uses.

While the mifepristone/misoprostol drug combination has only been approved by the FDA for medication abortions, the two drugs are also used in other medical contexts. “Off label” use of FDA-approved medications is permitted by the FDA, and a number of drugs are commonly prescribed off label.

Of particular note is the use of mifepristone after a miscarriage. Using mifepristone as part of post-miscarriage care has been demonstrated to be more effective than misoprostol alone. And, because approximately 10-15% of pregnancies result in a clinically recognized miscarriage, mifepristone is potentially applicable to a large number of clinical situations. However, due to its FDA approval status as an abortifacient, the drug has regulation and access barriers that limit why physicians are able to dispense it. As a result, women who have experienced miscarriage often have difficulty accessing this medication.

Because mifepristone has been approved for elective abortions, it is possible that changes in legislation that limit access to the drug may also limit access for other medical needs.

Alabama and Arizona are among the first states to call for a nearly complete ban on access to mifepristone in the past year. Additionally, a lawsuit was filed in Texas against the FDA, calling for the overturn of their decision to approve mifepristone. This lawsuit was filed in November by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM), an organization composed of several largely Christian medical associations, including the Catholic Medical Association. The group claimed in their motion that the 2000 accelerated approval of the drug was unlawful and put women at serious medical risk. In April of this year, the judge ruled to hold mifepristone’s status of FDA approval, introducing the possibility of removing mifepristone access in the United States because of its abortifacient classification. Notably, the drug’s use in miscarriage management was not mentioned in the judge’s official Memorandum.

In response to this decision, the Supreme Court has ruled to temporarily protect mifepristone access while the appeals process plays out. It seems likely that this case will return to the Supreme Court later this year, where a final verdict will be made. The outcome of these legal battles will play a critical role in establishing physicians’ avenues of care for patients of all kinds, and wholesale restriction on these medications may leave physicians and pharmacies treating early pregnancy loss with few options.

Because of this possibility, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) – along with 48 other organizations including the American Medical Association (AMA) – submitted a Citizen Petition to the FDA in October, calling for approval of mifepristone for miscarriage management. The outcome of this petition, and the impact of state-by-state legislation on access to these drugs, remains to be seen. The ACOG and AMA have also provided amicus briefs on behalf of the FDA in the current court case. In the event that FDA approval of mifepristone is reversed, there are limited circumstances under which physicians may still prescribe it. How these circumstances would apply to mifepristone, particularly in cases of pregnancy loss, is a matter for future discussion.

Changes in Mifepristone Access May Lead to Unregulated Administration, Putting Women at Risk

While mifepristone is currently approved by the FDA, like many drugs, there can be risks involved in using it, as well as circumstances under which it would be ill advised or dangerous to do so.

Because of this, the FDA requires that physicians fulfill certain certification requirements before being able to prescribe it (in the mifepristone/misoprostol combination form) so they know what to look out for as potential risk factors for their patients. As part of that certification, prescribers are required to read Prescribing Information on Mifeprex, which provides directions for administration, information on drug interactions, and risk factors (discussed below). Physicians are also required to submit a Prescriber Agreement Form to obtain certification, acknowledging that they understand the risks of the medication and have the ability to assess those risks and provide medical intervention if necessary. When physicians prescribe mifepristone with misoprostol to a patient, they must go over a Patient Agreement Form to ensure that the patient also knows what the risks are.

In the wake of post-Roe legal changes to drug access, there is some concern that women will seek these medications without physician oversight, either for elective abortion purposes or for other medical reasons. Without a physician/patient interface, drug administration without assessing risk factors and without appropriate knowledge of potential complications is a real possibility. A recent review by physicians at MedStar Washington Hospital Center and Georgetown University outlines these risks and complications, particularly for physicians in emergency departments who may be treating women who have self-administered the medications.

One of the primary concerns is diagnosing ectopic pregnancy, a life-threatening condition that requires early detection and intervention. Women using IUDs are at particular risk for ectopic pregnancy. Other risk factors include a history of bleeding disorders or use of anticoagulants/antiplatelet drugs, as this may result in serious or life-threatening bleeding with drug administration. Mifepristone/misoprostol use also comes with its own risks, particularly the possibility of infection if uterine clearing is incomplete. Lack of follow-up with a physician may preclude infection treatment, leaving women at risk for sepsis. There are also some risks associated with overdose of these medications, but overdose data are currently limited.  

Furthermore, acquiring these medications from a non-healthcare source introduces the possibility of taking counterfeit, mislabeled, or contaminated medication. The FDA strongly cautions against purchase of mifepristone over the Internet because “drugs purchased from foreign Internet sources are not the FDA-approved versions of the drugs, and they are not subject to FDA-regulated manufacturing controls or FDA inspection of manufacturing facilities.” The safety and efficacy of any off-market drugs cannot be guaranteed, and the source of a drug should be considered carefully before use.

Mifepristone is Currently Underexplored in Other Medical Contexts, Limiting Women’s Treatment Options

FDA regulations on mifepristone also limit its potential for use in other diseases. In addition to mifepristone’s established uses in elective abortion and management of early pregnancy loss, it has also been FDA approved for treatment of Cushing’s disease, and has been researched for treatment of a number of gynecologic uses, including breast and ovarian cancers and endometriosis. However, it has not been widely used in treatment of these diseases, in part due to current access restrictions. 

Mifepristone has also been studied for potential application in non-gynecological diseases such as insulin resistance, glaucoma, and various psychiatric diseases. Because the dosages studied for these diseases are lower than what is currently available to clinicians, it cannot be prescribed off label for these conditions. As a result, clinical research studies for these applications are only preliminary. Important considerations for further scientific study and clinical use include the potentially contraceptive impact of mifepristone on the woman’s reproductive cycle at lower dosages, as well as the effects of long term exposure to the medication. Both of these considerations require more extensive study and serious thought when mifepristone is explored as a medical intervention.

Women’s Experiences of Pain Have Been Overlooked in Conversations About Mifepristone

While FDA documentation describes the medical risks involved in taking mifepristone, the experience of taking the medication – including pain and pain management – appears to be largely absent.

The “Prescribing Information” notes the possibility of serious pain, but does so primarily as an indicator of infection or ectopic pregnancy, rather than a symptom on its own. The document also states that “abdominal pain/cramping is expected in all medical abortion patients and its incidence is not reported in clinical studies.”

Indeed, the Medical Review document submitted as part of the 2016 FDA approval of the current medication abortion regimen reports on page 69 that only two of the clinical studies submitted in support of approval reported on the pain experiences of participants. The Medical Review also states that abdominal pain “should only be considered adverse events if the amount of … pain exceeds what would be expected for such a process.” While guidelines of what qualifies as excessive pain would be critical information for physicians and patients, there is no indication in this document that any such delineation was probed in clinical studies – and the statement was not elaborated. The Prescriber and Patient Agreement Forms also offer no such guidelines, nor do they offer recommendations for patient pain management. 

The lack of standard guidelines on pain management leads to inconsistent practices for patient counseling and treatment. As a result, some women find a disconnect between the information they receive at the clinic about taking the drug and what they actually experience. In a recent survey conducted by FemCatholic, women recounted their experiences with the mifepristone/misoprostol combination medication. Of the women who responded, severe pain and trauma around the event were commonly reported. One woman was told by her doctor that “it would be uncomfortable, but if [she] took it before bed, [she] should be able to sleep through it.” Instead, she experienced hours of what she described as “the worst pain [she’d] ever felt.”

The respondent went on to call for increased dialogue about women’s pain experiences and pain management when taking these medications. She said, “[t]o not acknowledge the range of pain possible from woman to woman is an injustice … It’s as if because not all women have reactions of the same severity, the easier way is just to ignore that it happens at all. It’s also quite possible that the amount of women who do have a severe reaction is higher, but many just do so silently, assuming this is how it’s ‘supposed’ to be. We’ll never know unless we talk about it more.”

So, What’s the Real Story of the “Abortion Pill”?

The “abortion pill” is, in fact, a two-drug combination wherein one drug (misoprostol) is FDA approved for a non-abortion purpose, while the other (mifepristone) is FDA approved for medication abortion. Mifepristone can be used for medication abortion, but is also used to treat other medical conditions. Crucially, its potential to treat other medical issues has by and large gone unexplored due to its association with abortion. Mifepristone’s regulation and access change frequently, impacting patients of all kinds. Taking it comes with serious risks and, when it comes to the women who take it, more can be done to provide adequate counsel and care. 

In short: Like most things, the real story is a lot more complicated than what the surface seems to be.

December 23, 2022 marked a critical day for the emergency contraceptive levonorgestrel, more commonly known as Plan B. Since it was brought to the market, Plan B’s mechanism of action (MOA) has been the subject of much debate. The manufacturers of Plan B have long claimed that its primary MOA is delaying ovulation, thereby preventing pregnancy by ensuring that sperm and egg cannot come into contact. However, at the time of FDA approval in 1999, additional mechanisms for preventing pregnancy could not be ruled out – including those that would lead to an abortion. As a result, the possibility of an abortive mechanism has been indicated on Plan B’s drug label, making it a subject of controversy in the pro life community. However, after reviewing an application by Foundation Consumer Healthcare (the makers of Plan B), the FDA approved a change to the drug’s labeling material, removing abortion as a potential MOA for the first time since the drug’s initial approval.

Please read with discretion: This article contains discussion of sexual assault and abortion.

Could Changes to Plan B’s Drug Label Impact Catholic Healthcare for Victims of Sexual Assault?

According to the Decisional Memorandum, “Data are strong for a mechanism of action of delay or prevention of ovulation, and data are weak to speculative regarding any postovulatory mechanistic effects, such as on fertilization or implantation.” The Memorandum also contains a summary of the research submitted to the review team and of the team’s interpretation of that research. The FDA updated the Plan B information page on their website to state, in no uncertain terms, that in their professional opinion, Plan B is not an abortifacient.

For the majority of Catholics, the change in Plan B’s drug label does not have a particular impact. Because Plan B and generic forms of levonorgestrel are contraceptive, it is not permissible for Catholics to use within the context of consensual sexual encounters. As stated in the USCCB Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, “Just as the marriage act is joined naturally to procreation, so procreation is joined naturally to the marriage act.” 

However, when it comes to contraception use there is one critical exception: instances of sexual assault.

Directive 36 of the same USCCB document states, “Compassionate and understanding care should be given to a person who is the victim of sexual assault. . . . A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault.” Because sexual assault is not a consensual, unifying act, emergency contraception (EC) is permissible.

The USCCB document goes on to clarify that “if, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum.” In other words, a method that prevents conception – but does not cause an abortion – may be used to treat a victim of assault.

Because the MOA of Plan B included the possibility of abortive action, its applicability for treating victims of assault according to the USCCB directive has, to date, been unclear. As a result, Catholic healthcare settings have differed in their policies regarding its use.

A 2005 nationwide survey of Catholic hospitals revealed that, of the 597 hospitals surveyed, 23% said that they would provide EC only to assault victims and 55% said that they would not provide EC under any circumstance. In order to mitigate the possibility of the drug having an abortive effect, other Catholic hospitals implement the “appropriate testing” prerogative in the USCCB directive by developing protocols to test for pregnancy or ovulation prior to dispensing Plan B. These protocols are not universally applied, however, as individual hospitals decide which protocols to use and how.

The FDA’s assessment of Plan B’s MOA has the potential to provide needed clarity in understanding the drug’s applicability to caring for victims of assault. If this new assessment is accepted by Catholic physicians, this would open the door to creating a standard of care for such cases within Catholic healthcare.

However, this outcome appears, at present, unlikely.

Many Catholic Physicians Remain Uncertain About the MOA of Plan B

As new studies exploring Plan B’s MOA have been published, the predominant interpretation among the authors has been that Plan B is not an abortifacient.

Studies of Plan B’s efficacy in preventing ovulation (its proposed primary mechanism), as well as studies of endometrial lining and hormonal changes following Plan B administration, led those scientists to the conclusion that Plan B acts by inhibiting or preventing ovulation, but would not affect a baby’s implantation in the uterus if conception did occur. In assessing the scientific literature, the FDA came to the same conclusion.

However, several Catholic physicians have voiced concerns over these studies, highlighting the studies’ limitations and offering alternative interpretations. One 2017 analysis of the scientific literature, published in the journal for the Catholic Medical Association (CMA), asserts that Plan B may not be as effective at preventing ovulation as it is marketed to be, and that it may indeed cause changes that would impact a pregnancy post-fertilization (i.e. that there is a possibility of having an abortive effect). A 2014 publication written by Dr. Kathleen Raviele, an OB/GYN and former president of CMA, emphasized that Plan B’s effectiveness at delaying ovulation is greatly diminished in the 1 to 2 days immediately prior to ovulation – calling to question whether the pregnancy prevention rate of 7 out of 8 women (as stated on the Plan B website) can be fully accounted for by ovulation delay.

Because of these lingering questions, the CMA issued a statement in 2015 that, as an association, it does not recommend Plan B for use as EC in cases of rape. The FDA’s decision to change Plan B’s drug label has not changed that opinion.

In an interview with Dr. Raviele, she explained that “[t]he FDA did not make that decision based on any new research” that fully addressed the CMA’s concerns. The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) released a statement in February of this year, echoing Dr. Raviele’s words. The NCBC said that “the FDA did not address all factors relevant to how LNG-EC can impact human life after fertilization” and that the organization would “maintain its longstanding position that Catholic health care institutions and professionals should ensure with moral certitude (that is, by excluding any reasonable doubts), at a minimum, that LNG-EC [Plan B] is not dispensed when it could not prevent ovulation but may well cause the death of an embryo.”

Notably, Catholic physicians may not be completely united in the CMA’s assessment of Plan B’s MOA.

Regarding the 2015 CMA statement, Dr. Raviele stated, “I can guarantee that many members may not agree with it . . . but the CMA has always been faithful to the Magisterium and this statement is in keeping with our mission.”

A 2022 publication in the CMA journal also argued that Catholic hospitals’ differing policies towards Plan B administration demonstrate that “reasonable disagreement exists among thoughtful Catholics on this issue.” In a follow up interview on this article, author Dr. Brummett elaborated on this thought, saying, “Whether there is ‘sufficient’ scientific evidence to ‘establish’ that [Plan B] has no abortive MOA depends upon what one believes to be at stake ethically speaking. For example, if you have heartburn, and I offer you a home remedy that I have seen work in a few friends, you might be open to trying it on the basis of that anecdotal evidence. However, if one believes that abortion is the murder of an innocent human life and therefore absolutely evil, then one's standard for ‘scientific proof’ might be very difficult, or even impossible, to meet. One might always demand another study, on another population, under another set of conditions in order to be satisfied.” Because further clinical studies would also be considered unethical to Catholics, differences in opinion in Catholic healthcare over Plan B’s MOA may never be fully settled.

While Plan B May Not be Universally Adopted in Catholic Healthcare, Other Avenues of Care are Available

While Plan B may not be able to be universally adopted in Catholic healthcare settings, it is still possible for Catholic physicians to provide compassionate care for victims of assault.

In the CMA 2022 article, Dr. Brummett and his colleagues argue that individual physicians should be allowed to follow their own conscience, calling for “Catholic leadership at hospitals that prohibit emergency contraception for rape victims to accommodate physicians who wish to provide levonorgestrel as a matter of conscience.” Permitting physicians within a Catholic hospital setting to draw their own conclusions from the scientific literature and to make care decisions accordingly has the potential to help resolve the conflict.

However, Dr. Raviele explained that one caveat to this approach is ensuring that physicians are able to balance their interpretation of scientific literature with ethical decision making. As she puts it, “The most important thing is that the physician’s conscience is well formed, and in many cases a physician’s conscience is not well formed.” As an alternative for physicians in Catholic hospitals that do not dispense Plan B, Dr. Raviele also suggested conducting a conscientious referral to a pharmacy, where Plan B is available over-the-counter.

Dr. Raviele’s 2014 article also highlighted another potential treatment option for victims of assault, which may have a higher certainty of preventing conception without causing abortion if taken before ovulation. Meloxicam, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), is a partially selective COX-2 inhibitor and an effective anovulant, preventing ovulation in 91% of women according to a 2010 study. A 2022 study also demonstrated no significant difference in endometrial line striping, indicating that implantation may not be significantly affected. Scientific exploration of meloxicam as an EC method remains preliminary. Nevertheless, it may be worth exploring as an alternative.

For Catholic Doctors, Providing Compassionate Care to Victims of Assault is a “Landmine of Conscience”

For Catholic doctors, providing compassionate, conscientious care to victims of sexual assault often calls for making difficult decisions between opposing goods. It involves looking carefully at the science of the treatments available, and balancing the interpretation of that data with moral imperatives.

It is, in Dr. Raviele’s words, a “landmine of conscience.” But, no matter the challenges, it is a landmine worth walking into.

My hopes for the Barbie movie were as high as a pair of hot pink pair stilettos. Naturally, I was terrified they would snap and twist my ankle. As the theater filled with adults in bubble-gum-colored skirts and cowgirl hats, the electric murmur of anticipation grew. We’d all seen the ads, the memes, and the YouTube walk-throughs of the elaborate Barbie Dreamhouse sets. We expected to be blown away, which is a lot to ask from a movie about a doll. My greatest fear was that we’d already seen everything worthwhile about this film. Imagine my glee when the opening moments caught me completely by surprise.

Writer/Director/Actor Greta Gerwig has proven herself to be a master of women’s stories, with a filmography that includes instant classics such as Frances Ha (2012), Lady Bird (2017), and Little Women (2019). In Barbie, she has created something original, combining all of the hopefulness, imagination, nostalgia, and baggage of the ubiquitous toy into a pink fantasia of topsy-turvy feminist critique. She asks you to look deep into the eyes of your childhood doll, remembering all the times you had together and all the dreams you shared – and then she yanks it from your hands and whacks you upside the head with it.

“Thanks to Barbie, all the problems of feminism and equal rights have been solved,” intones the voice of Helen Mirren in the first moments of the film. “. . .At least, that’s what the Barbies think.” 

This juxtaposition lays out the essential conflict of the story: Barbie (Margot Robbie) is living a perfect life in Barbieland when she suddenly becomes plagued with uncontrollable thoughts of death. In the hopes of undoing this horrible malfunction, Barbie and her wannabe boyfriend Ken (Ryan Gosling) venture into the Real World on a quest to make the little girl who plays with her happy again. Once they get to the Real World, they discover that women aren’t actually doing all that well. Chaos ensues.

Barbie is a visual delight and a joyous romp through the pangs of girlhood. It’s also a surprisingly astute critique of modern feminism.

While not ground-breaking by any measure, Barbie correctly identifies the essential trap of womanhood: Be pretty, but not too pretty. Smart, but not too smart. Successful, but not ambitious. Whether we have no children, are working moms, or stay-at-home moms, we’re doing motherhood wrong. We’re going about our careers wrong or we’re dating wrong. As angsty preteen Sasha (Ariana Greenblatt) quips, “Women hate women. And men hate women. It’s the only thing we all agree on.”

It’s also really hard to be a man. Barbie arrives at the perfect moment, when conversations about positive masculinity are at the forefront. Ken, who has always defined himself in relation to Barbie, must come to terms with his own identity. If he is neither desiring Barbie nor subjugating her, then what is he doing? Can Ken exist without Barbie’s adoration? Is he really “Kenough” on his own? (The Ken puns in this movie are exquisite, by the way.)

Men and women are not the same, but we need not exist in conflict. The essential lie of patriarchy has always been that subjugation of the other is the key to survival. In reality, most men don’t thrive under a patriarchal system, as Ken quickly discovers.

Men and women actually need each other, and not only romantically. We need each other because we are human. We need to be seen and cherished, not because of our career status, our physical attractiveness, or even our personal achievements. We need to be seen and cherished for our essential human dignity, and nothing more. Barbie gets that. Pretty good for a movie about a doll.

On July 22, Catholics celebrate the feast day of St. Mary Magdalene, which Pope Francis elevated from a Memorial to an official Feast in 2016. This change in status puts her liturgical celebration on the same level as those of Jesus’s twelve apostles. It signifies that Mary Magdalene is a pivotal figure in Christianity — and yet, there are vastly different perceptions of who she is because of a complicated history that has filtered down from the Church into pop culture. So, who was Mary Magdalene, really? Let’s start with what the Gospels tell us.

Fact: What the Gospels Tell Us About Mary Magdalene

Jesus rid Mary Magdalene of seven demons.

Luke 8:2 and Mark 16:9 tell us that Jesus healed Mary Magdalene of seven demons. In both cases, the Gospel writer mentions it as an aside, or as a way of explaining who Mary is, rather than including a full story about it. Neither gospel offers any further explanation or interpretation of the “demons” within the text, but traditionally “demons” can be interpreted to represent either a physical or moral malady.

Mary Magdalene was a close follower of Jesus.

The four Gospels agree on the overall arc of the story of Jesus’s ministry, but they are geared toward different audiences and sometimes contain different stories. Yet, all four Gospels agree about the fact that Mary Magdalene was a close follower of Jesus.

The Gospel of Luke includes her in a group of “women who had been cured of evil spirits and infirmities” (Luke 8:2) who traveled alongside Jesus and his apostles, and who “provided for them out of their resources” (Luke 8:3). The footnote in my New American Bible notes that it would have been very unusual to associate women with Jesus’s ministry in this way given the typical attitude of first-century Palestinian Judaism toward women, which would have cautioned against speaking with women in public.

Mary Magdalene was at the foot of the cross.

This is another element of the crucifixion story that is common across all four Gospels. While the majority of Jesus’s male apostles fled the scene when Jesus was sentenced to death, Mary Magdalene was among a small group of women who stood by Jesus’s side as he died.

Mary Magdalene was present at Jesus’s tomb on Easter morning.

Once again, all four Gospel writers agree upon this fact, even if the stories are slightly different. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Mary is among a group of women who had returned to the tomb but found it empty. After meeting an angel who told them the news of Jesus’s resurrection, the women are sent to tell the disciples. In the Gospel of John, it was Mary Magdalene alone who discovered the empty tomb.

Not only was Mary the first witness to the empty tomb, but she was the first one to whom the Risen Jesus appeared. Jesus calls Mary by name before instructing her to “go to [his] brothers and tell them, ‘I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God” (John 20:17). She does as she is told, and is the first to tell Jesus’s disciples, “I have seen the Lord” (John 20:18). For this reason, she is often called the “Apostle to the Apostles,” a title first coined by St. Thomas Aquinas.

For many Catholics who are most familiar with the Easter story as it is proclaimed from the Gospel on Easter Sunday, the part of the story where Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene is unknown. This is because even when the Gospel reading for Easter Sunday Mass is from the Gospel of John, the reading ends before the passage with Jesus’s appearance to Mary Magdalene.

Fiction: The Myths About Mary Magdalene

Beyond these facts, we can’t say anything about Mary Magdalene for sure. This means that several common myths about her are, at the very least, unproven, and at the very worst, ill-intentioned. Let’s look at a few.

Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. 

There is nothing in the text of the Bible to support this common perception of Mary Magdalene. As stated above, two of the Gospels mentioned that she was healed from seven demons, but neither of them mention sins caused by those demons, let alone specifically sexual sins. So, where did this idea come from?

In 591, Pope Gregory the Great conflated Mary Magdalene with an unnamed sinful woman in Luke chapter 7, as well as with Mary of Bethany (Martha’s sister). The text of Luke 7 does not label the sins that the “sinful woman” had as sexual, nor does it name her as Mary Magdalene. Yet, this statement from his homily became Church teaching.

In 1969, as a part of a revision to the liturgical calendar and practices, the Church acknowledged that these were three distinct women who should be separated. However, it is hard to undo more than a millennium’s worth of damage in a small portion of a text that the majority of Catholics would not read — so this caricature of Mary Magdalene still remains in many people’s imaginations.

Mary and Jesus had a romantic relationship.

For people who encounter the story of Mary Magdalene mostly through pop culture, this might be the most prevailing myth about her thanks to The Da Vinci Code and Jesus Christ Superstar.

I have always thought the development of this trope of a romantic relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene was due to a misguided assumption that men and women cannot have close friendships or working relationships without there being romantic or sexual tension. If not that, then a related sexist attitude that cannot accept a woman on her own terms, and must define her by the man she spends the most time with.

I still think that is part of it, but it turns out that these pop cultural interpretations aren’t entirely without textual basis. They can be traced back to an apocryphal gospel (meaning that it was not chosen by the Church to be included in the Bible) known as the Gospel of Phillip. It referred to Mary as “Jesus’s companion” and stated that Jesus loved her most out of all of the disciples. It also stated that Jesus would kiss Mary, but damage to the text caused the word that describes where he would kiss her to be unreadable. Some scholars filled in that missing word as mouth, which furthered the interpretation of their relationship being romantic.

Mary Magdalene: Prototype for Female Leadership in the Catholic Church?

Mary Magdalene’s presence in the history of Christianity has been tumultuous, to say the least. Many (maybe all?) of the decisions about how her story was integrated into the tradition of the Church were made by men, which has led some to blame misogyny for the fact that she was mistakenly viewed as a quiet, repentant prostitute for more than a millennium, and for the fact that the story of Jesus’s appearance to her and commissioning of her to the Apostles has been left out of the Easter lectionary.

In a world where women are simultaneously over-sexualized and punished for being too sexual, it feels like a familiar framework to see a woman who is identified purely by her (unproven) sexual sins, while her leadership role is downplayed.

We don’t know anyone’s true motivation for these decisions, but the effects remain the same. A woman who ought to have been celebrated from the beginning as someone who closely followed Jesus, provided for him and his disciples, and was the first to proclaim his resurrection was instead largely silenced and discounted. Thankfully, the Church has clarified its tradition, and with the help of Pope Francis’s elevation of her Memorial to a Feast, she is quickly becoming viewed more as the prototype for what female leadership in the Church could look like.

Dear Therapist,

My girlfriend is a devout Christian and she’s strongly considering becoming Catholic, but she’s been on birth control for about 5 years due to debilitating periods and she’s nervous to go off of it. “I understand logically why the Church doesn’t allow it, but I’m still not entirely sure I agree,” is sort of the summation of her position. For some reason, I don’t like thinking about the fact that she’s on it, even though she isn’t doing anything immoral since we aren’t sexually active. Is it best that I not bother bringing it up? And if so, should I just avoid dwelling on it? It’s become a touchy subject for her so I want to approach it as wisely as possible, but also don’t want to ignore it, especially if we end up getting married. I’d really appreciate any thoughts you might have.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Response from Regina Boyd, LMHC

Hi Anonymous,

It sounds like she is someone you see yourself marrying, which makes this conversation important for your future. 

Let’s first look at the facts. Your girlfriend has a medical condition and she is using something prescribed for relief from debilitating periods. That prescription drug is also used as a form of birth control, but that is not why she is using it.

Catholics who strive to form their conscience with Church teaching may bristle at the thought of using birth control, but let’s take a look at this passage from Humanae Vitae by St. Pope Paul VI:

“. . . the Church does not consider illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.” (Humanae Vitae 15)

Your girlfriend is treating a disease with a drug that will create a “foreseeable impediment to procreation.” In the words of a pope and a saint, “the Church does not consider [this] illicit.”

Now, let’s talk about your relationship. If she is someone you hope to marry one day and you’ve been dating for a reasonably long time, it is important to have conversations about what you both want in marriage. 

What are your hopes, dreams, and visions? What do you each believe about the role of a husband and wife, and are you each comfortable with that? For example, do you desire a wife who solely raises children, or one who works outside of the home, as well? What does she envision her role to be and what does she desire in a husband? How many children would you hope to have? Do you want to raise your children in the Catholic faith?

These are all questions I suggest couples have BEFORE getting married. These are not topics you want to figure out as you go along. Part of discernment for marriage is seeing if your visions align. If they are not aligned, can you compromise and still feel comfortable? If your non-negotiables simply don’t match up, then it may be time to reconsider this relationship.

I’d also encourage you to think about why you are uncomfortable with her treating a disease with birth control, even though such use is not necessarily sinful. Have you expressed your concerns about birth control to her in the past, and if so, what were you trying to accomplish? Were you trying to ensure she lives according to your vision for marriage? Does she hold this same vision? Were you concerned about the health risks associated with birth control, or was it something else? Getting to the root of your sense of urgency may provide clarity on how to proceed.

If you desire to use natural family planning in marriage and you’ve been dating long enough to have conversations about the future, I’d consider sharing your vision for marriage with her. This will give her insight into your heart and help both of you discern how to move forward in the relationship. Of course, there’s no need to proceed with a judgmental tone, but rather in a way that expresses your hopes and dreams for your future family. Hopefully this is something that she will take into consideration if she sees you in her future.

Because you aren’t engaged, there is no rush. You have time to discuss your position and discern stronger commitments. Once you’ve been clear about your desires, and you’ve listened to her perspective, I would recommend taking a step back from this conversation — especially considering how frustrating it likely is for her. No one likes to be sick, and she is probably tired of dealing with her condition. 

You will now have more information to help in your discernment process. Is she open to taking steps toward becoming more aligned with your views? Is she willing to learn more about your beliefs? Is she respectful of your beliefs, even if she doesn’t agree? Is this someone who you would want to raise your children, even if her belief and position on this issue never change?

The answers to these questions should inform how you move forward. 

In the meantime, give her some space. It sounds like when you discuss this topic, it leads to frustration and tension. This may be because she either is not clear on how important this is for you, or holds a different viewpoint. Space conveys your respect for her free will and shows your willingness to accept her, even if she makes different decisions than you do. This can help facilitate more trust within your relationship.

Wishing you all the best!