Search Posts

The way our culture teaches boys and young men how to be “masculine” is rarely healthy. The same can be said for the way we teach girls and young women how to be “feminine.” Both are largely based on stereotypes and harmful, unachievable standards - and members of the Catholic Church are no exception in providing such an education. I increasingly see devout, well-intentioned Catholics promoting elements of toxic masculinity in misguided attempts to be relatable, emphasize sexual complementarity, or teach virtue. As Catholics, we need to address toxic masculinity and how it’s taught to our boys and young men. Let’s start the conversation with a review of what toxic masculinity is and what it is not.

Toxic Masculinity Is:

Defining “masculinity” by harmful stereotypes, including aggression and excessive drinking.

A commentary on an investigation into deaths related to bachelor parties stated,

“[a] stereotype that’s part of toxic masculinity is ‘men should drink extremely large amounts of alcohol, and in particular should never refuse to drink alcohol that their friends are trying to get them to drink.’ This leads to long-term negative effects such as alcohol-related diseases, but can also have dramatic short-term effects, as when men die of alcohol poisoning or alcohol-related accidents on stag trips.”

The pressure placed on men to prove their manliness through physical strength or a willingness to fight is also related to this.

Objectifying women.

This is most obviously seen in the assumption (and encouragement) that all men watch pornography and in the social acceptability of “locker room talk.” However, in addition to including vulgar and sexualized perspectives on women, this objectification can be seen in condescending attitudes that masquerade as chivalry or gentlemanliness. Even the most well-intentioned Christian men can be blinded to the fact that seeing a woman as a “treasure” to “protect” instead of as an equal partner with her own agency can objectify her.

Discouraging men from openly talking about their emotions and/or mental health.

Researcher Dr. Brené Brown found that shame is triggered differently in men and women. For men, shame is typically synonymous with weakness. A frequent consequence of this is that men are less likely to express their emotions or seek mental health treatment out of fear of being perceived as weak - a fear that can have serious medical consequences.

Shaming men for being “effeminate.”

One of the most pervasive symptoms of toxic masculinity is the pressure on men to avoid being seen as “feminine,” in this case narrowly defined as being too sensitive, being too interested in art or clothes, or having the wrong mannerisms - all of which can be cause for perceiving a man as effeminate.

Shaming men for their sexual orientation.

According to the rules of toxic masculinity, only straight men can be “real men.” This encourages shaming gay and bisexual men for their sexual orientation or shaming men who seem “too gay.” This is often due to the misconception that a man’s identity as a man is dependent on his ability to fit into masculine stereotypes, a misconception that furthers the stereotype that being gay makes a man “woman-like.”

Encouraged by both men and women.

It’s not just other men who encourage toxic masculinity. Often, it’s the women in a man’s life who pressure him to play the role of the emotionless “tough guy” who should be able to hold his alcohol and never cower from a physical fight. When men think they will be a disappointment if they don’t fulfill this role for a girlfriend or wife, it inhibits them from being themselves and expressing their emotional needs.

Toxic Masculinity Is Not:

The belief that masculinity is toxic.

Some resist the phrase “toxic masculinity” because they understand it as an attack on masculinity. They perceive it to mean that manhood is inherently toxic. However, “toxic masculinity” describes a particular portrayal of masculinity that is harmful to everyone - including men.

Sexual complementarity.

Sexual complementarity refers to the teaching that God created man and woman, being of equal personhood and dignity, with “physical [and] spiritual difference and complementarity . . . oriented toward the goods of marriage and flourishing of family life” (CCC 2333).

A feminist myth.

The term was originally coined by a men’s movement in the 1980s, which sought to rescue men from the standard of aggressive masculine behavior and allow them to express themselves emotionally and creatively. Their claim was that this more emotional, spiritual, and creative masculinity was “true” masculinity. Since then, this account of masculinity has been debunked by sociologists who typically understand the idea of masculinity as unique to each historical and socio-cultural context.Toxic masculinity was not invented by modern feminism to attack men. The term “toxic masculinity” was popularized by feminists because of its close association with rape culture. An example of this association is the standard of toxic masculinity that “[m]en should have as much heterosexual sex as possible, regardless of whether it’s wanted by the women involved.”

Holiness.

Becoming a holy man has nothing to do with toxic masculinity. In fact, holiness has nothing to do with proving your manliness to anyone. Holiness is Christ’s life in us as we grow in virtue; it is not defined by seeking any particular masculinity in any particular cultural context. There is no such thing as one “true” kind of masculinity that makes someone more “manly” or holier than another.

Why Should Catholics be Concerned?

Toxic masculinity undermines the dignity of human beings.

Encouraging men to value themselves on the basis of aggression, lust, and emotional repression (or any singular social standard) is not a healthy way of living for anyone, let alone someone striving for holiness in Christ. Toxic masculinity undermines the dignity of women by encouraging men to objectify them, and it undermines the dignity of men by encouraging them to base their value on superficial and harmful norms.

Toxic masculinity isn’t in line with Church teaching.

There is no Church teaching that endorses the enforcement of cultural gender norms. Furthermore, encouraging men towards lust, aggression, egotism, and arrogance is the opposite of holiness.

What Can We Do?

The Catholic feminist movement is already making slow, but significant, progress in addressing “toxic femininity,” including purity culture. However, there is much work to be done by Catholics to address toxic masculinity. Men’s and women’s sessions and retreats often unintentionally reinforce the stereotypes that breed insecurity around gender roles and subsequently feed into toxic understandings of masculinity and femininity.

‍We can begin this work by emphasizing how there is not a singular way to be a “true” man or woman, especially when we discuss the nature of femininity and masculinity. At the end of the day, the way for any individual to become who they were created to be is to live in union with Christ. God does not ask us to fulfill socially defined stereotypes. He asks us to belong to Him.

It’s almost that time of year: election season. These days, with Democratic politicians throwing their hat into the presidential ring every other day, it can seem like the 2020 election is knocking at our doors, demanding that we choose a preliminary candidate to support. I imagine most of you have probably heard the joke about the two topics you don’t discuss at the dinner table or on a first date: religion and politics. Given that this is FemCatholic, the first rule is already out the window. Let’s go ahead and throw the second rule out the window, too.

Before I dive into an introduction to Catholic political engagement, allow me to explain my background and why this topic appeals to me. I’m a cradle Catholic who is passionate about politics and public service. I have always kept a career as a politician in my back pocket, and I currently work for an elected judge. Recently, I noticed a considerable change in the manner in which people discuss politics, if they discuss it at all. From hostile dinner table conversations to Facebook comment wars, people seem unable now, more than ever, to engage in constructive political dialogue. If people dare to discuss politics, they do so within their own echo chambers, where they are surrounded by like-minded people who reinforce their opinions. This is why I want to discuss the current culture of politics and how Catholics can alter this landscape and participate meaningfully in politics.

“We don’t have an anger problem in American politics. We have a contempt problem.” – Arthur Brooks

How many of you winced when you saw the title of this article? How many of you brace for impact when conversations take a political turn? Both are understandable reactions.

Social scientist Arthur Brooks asserts that the current political climate has been overtaken by “the culture of contempt.” Contempt is defined as “the act of despising” and a “lack of respect or reverence for something.” Brooks summarizes the culture of contempt as the disdainful and scornful treatment of others because of their political opinions. This culture makes politics at the dinner table seem like a recipe for disaster. It is also the gasoline that fuels Facebook and Twitter wars.

Brooks summarizes the culture of contempt as the disdainful and scornful treatment of others because of their political opinions.

The culture of contempt is problematic for several reasons. Just take a look at the definition above; the culture of contempt is problematic because of the actions which characterize it. Despise, scorn, and disdain should not be the hallmark qualities of our politics. Such conduct is dehumanizing because it reduces people to their ideologies. It promotes constant “othering,” sorting people into ideological buckets at the expense of their dignity and individuality. People are more than the sum of their political views, and their inherent dignity depends in no way on their political opinions. The culture of contempt goads us into believing that people take positions on issues for arbitrary reasons and focuses on labels at the expense of reasons. For example, a woman who is vehemently pro-choice may have a friend who became pregnant by rape. Perhaps she became pregnant herself in the middle of college and had an abortion in order to finish her education. Maybe a friend of yours from church supports same-sex marriage because he has a brother who is gay and partnered. Neither of these people should be labeled as “a typical feminist” or “just another liberal.” We should engage people to discover the reasons behind their political views because doing so allows us to encounter their humanity.

We should engage people to discover the reasons behind their political views because doing so allows us to encounter their humanity.

The culture of contempt is also problematic because it impedes constructive political dialogue. Dialogue across the aisle is impossible without a foundation of respect. As Arthur Brooks explains, no one has ever been insulted into agreement. The culture of contempt also reduces overall well-being. Being treated with contempt engenders resentment, and treating others with contempt causes biological stress reactions. This culture also creates ideological extremism and fuels the creation of echo chambers, where political beliefs are isolated from disagreement.

As I hope is evident from the examples above, the culture of contempt is a poor substitute for political dialogue. While the culture of contempt may be an apt description for the current state of American politics, it doesn’t have to be this way, and it shouldn’t be any longer. We need to restore true dialogue: genuine, two-way communication with an unshakable foundation of respect. As members of a Church that endorses human dignity and respect as fundamental principles, Catholics can change the culture of contempt into one of respectful disagreement.

“[C]ontempt is based on a mistaken assumption - that there is no room for common ground.” - Arthur Brooks

As Archbishop Charles Chaput explains in his book Render Unto Caesar, Catholics have an obligation to be engaged and visible in the political sphere. The separation of church and state does not equate to abdication of political involvement by religious people. Moreover, the fact that politics is saturated with contempt does not excuse us from participating. We have the power and the responsibility to change the culture of contempt into a culture of respectful disagreement.

A culture of respectful disagreement is exactly what it sounds like: a culture rife with disagreement and founded upon unconditional respect. When I was growing up, my dad always told me that people can disagree without being disagreeable. This is perhaps the cardinal, yet often overlooked, rule of political engagement. Being disagreeable is a symptom of the culture of contempt. Disagreeing, on the other hand, is simply part of democracy. Disagreement forces us to question our views and defend them against challenge. Isolating ourselves from disagreement is a disservice not only to ourselves, but also to society writ large.

Being disagreeable is a symptom of the culture of contempt. Disagreeing, on the other hand, is simply part of democracy.

The culture of contempt fools us into thinking that ideological competition is the source of our dissatisfaction. However, ideological competition fuels our progress as a nation. Rather than accept a solution which is the equivalent of a duct-tape job on a leaky pipe, we need to do the hard work of relearning the art of respectful disagreement. The culture of contempt has conditioned us to accept as persuasive philosophically weak arguments, such as ad hominem attacks, rather than argue the substance of political ideas. Don’t like what someone is saying about immigration? Just call the person a bigot and move on. We deserve better than this, and so does the world. We cannot serve our country as informed citizens if the only skill we have is name-calling. Our country and our world deserve our ideological best, which entails debating, not debasing.

“If we say we’re Catholic we need to prove it. America’s public life needs people willing to stand alone, without apologies, for the truth of the Catholic faith and the common human values it defends.” - Archbishop Charles Chaput

Though modern politics attempts to force us to go right or left and always don a party affiliation, neither political party fully embodies the teachings of the Church. We must remember that we are Catholics first, not red or blue, elephant or donkey. It’s unlikely that the Church will ever fit into a convenient political box. Despite this incongruity, we must be courageous and forge our own political path, consulting our Church and examining our consciences.

[N]either political party fully embodies the teachings of the Church. . . .[W]e must be courageous and forge our own political path, consulting our Church and examining our consciences.

The reality that the Church isn’t perfectly in step with either political party doesn’t allow us to opt out of politics. Whether we opt out by not voting at all or by trying to keep the Church out of the election booth, neither is consistent with our duty as Catholics. We have an obligation to witness to the Church through our civic engagement. We also have a duty to follow the Church’s teachings as expounded upon. No aspect of our lives can or should be separated from our Catholic identity, and I firmly believe that we will be called to answer for our political choices at the end of our lives. We should vote according to our conscience, all the while recognizing (albeit with difficulty, sometimes) the Church’s teachings. As Archbishop Chaput explains,

"Conscience has the task of telling us the hard truth about our actions. The church has the task of expressing God’s love and leading us to salvation . . . Some Catholics may find themselves sincerely unable, in conscience, to accept a point of Catholic teaching. When that happens, the test of a believer’s honesty is his humility; that is, his willingness to put the matter to real prayer and the seriousness of his effort to accept the wisdom of the church and follow her guidance. If after this effort he still cannot reconcile himself with the teaching of the church, he must do what he believes to be right, because ultimately, every Catholic must follow his or her conscience."

As we prepare for the 2020 election, I encourage you to survey the political landscape and take your anticipated vote to prayer. If you wrestle with a particular issue or a particular candidate, talk to a priest or spiritual advisor. Ultimately, we are all called to vote our conscience.

While the task of transforming our political climate is formidable, it is not impossible. I believe Catholics can successfully end the culture of contempt, promoting respectful disagreement and initiating dialogue on important issues. I believe Catholics can vigorously debate political issues without degrading others. Finally, I believe Catholics can be Catholics, instead of Republicans or Democrats, first. The Church calls us to transform the world by our witness. Let’s get to work.

When my local grocery store announced their new free grocery pick-up, I secretly gave it a try. Secretly, because it felt indulgent. I wondered if I was lazy for having someone else do what I'm perfectly capable of doing myself.

For a lesson in maternal guilt, pay attention to the moments before and after a woman confesses that she hires a cleaning person, a mother's helper, or a meal planning delivery service to alleviate her workload. Before: she glances around uncomfortably to check who's within earshot. After: she justifies the expense by quickly rambling through a description of current extenuating circumstances (as if family life itself weren't extenuating enough).

Do men feel the need to justify similar actions in this way? Do they duck when driving through a carwash, embarrassed that the family budget subsidizes their decision not to scrub and wax the car themselves? Are there whispered confessions in men's locker rooms about hiring a lawn service? For some reason, work traditionally done by men doesn't have the same social stigma when it’s outsourced.

Why would outsourcing be seen as a staple for men, but a luxury for women?

Perhaps men are better at letting go of unrealistic expectations on their time. Outsourcing helps them focus on the work that's most important. It's the virtue of prudence:

"Prudence is the virtue that disposes practical reason to discern our true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it." (CCC 1806)

Mother's Day is the busiest restaurant day of the year. Are dads being lazy? Maybe. Everyone wants to honor their mom, but no one wants to do for one day the work that a lot of moms do every day: planning, cooking, and cleaning.

Perhaps, though, the busyness of restaurants on Mother's Day is just another example of men exercising prudence: disposing practical reason to recognize their limitations and using the means necessary (money and a restaurant) to accomplish a true good (celebrating mom). Perhaps more moms could use restaurants to exercise prudence for special occasions and for family life in general.

But why does prudence seem more difficult for women than for men? Under pressure from both social and religious norms, motherhood has become synonymous with martyrdom in a way that fatherhood has not.

[M]otherhood has become synonymous with martyrdom in a way that fatherhood has not.

A good message - that true love requires sacrifice - has been internalized incorrectly and twisted into lies that many well-meaning mothers follow in good faith:

Self-care is a form of selfishness.

Holiness means suffering silently.

God intends for mothers to care for their children without help.

Spending money on childcare, housework, or food preparation is a waste of a family's finances (but not money spent on lawn care or cosmetic car maintenance).

Even when working a job outside the home that pays the household bills, time away from your family is stolen (unless you're a father).

Personal hobbies or interests are a distraction from a mother's vocation (but not a father's).

If I'm not sacrificing myself to the point of death, I am not fully living my vocation.

That last message may sound extreme in suggesting that the pinnacle of motherhood is physical death in service to your family. Unfortunately, some retellings of the life of St. Gianna Molla reinforce this false message.

A common version of St. Gianna's story recounts how she was diagnosed with a life-threatening condition while pregnant and refused an abortion. The baby lived, while St. Gianna died: her death to save her child represents the highest calling of motherhood. To tell her story in this way can create an expectation that I doubt St. Gianna would place on mothers: the pressure to relentlessly and unnecessarily push themselves to unhealthy limits, even death, in the name of "holy motherhood."

In reality, the story of St. Gianna is more nuanced and sends a much stronger message for mothers. St. Gianna was a respected pediatrician (a working mom!) with three young children. While pregnant with her fourth child, she was diagnosed with a uterine tumor.

According to Catholic teaching, she could have chosen a hysterectomy to cure her condition. The unborn child would die as a secondary effect, but the intent of the medical intervention would be to save the life of the mother, not to kill the child. A hysterectomy is an ethical choice for mothers facing this difficult situation.

St. Gianna also could have chosen no intervention at all. She could continue the pregnancy, delaying her own medical care until the baby was safely delivered. She did not choose this option. St. Gianna chose to have surgery, while two months pregnant, to remove the tumor without removing her uterus.

She did not passively accept death. St. Gianna did everything possible to choose life for both herself and her unborn child. She delivered a healthy baby seven months after surgery. Unfortunately and unexpectedly, one week after the child was born, St. Gianna died from septic peritonitis, a severe infection.

St. Gianna's legacy is one of heroic prudence: using practical reason (her medical background and Catholic Faith) to discern the right means (surgery to remove a tumor) to achieve a true good (the life of both herself and her child). That it didn't turn out as she hoped, that in the end it cost her life, does not justify using her sainthood to promote a passive, hopeless, inevitable martyrdom of mothers.

St. Gianna did everything possible to choose life for both herself and her unborn child. . . . [Her] legacy is one of heroic prudence.

Does the way we talk about the life of St. Gianna Molla encourage mothers toward prudence, using their available resources to pursue the "true good in every circumstance" for both themselves and their children, as St. Gianna did? Or does it pressure mothers to presume their own death as necessary to fulfilling their ordinary maternal vocation?

Among Christians, there exists a tendency to force a cross onto mothers that's heavier than what a conscientious approach to our vocation would mandate. This can lead to gas lighting, isolation, and a devaluation of the lives of mothers.

When mothers begin to question whether their burden is heavier than God intends for them to carry, they're often met with dismissive or detached advice to "offer it up," "find the joy," or "trust that God won't give you more than you can handle." Well-intentioned Christian blogs suggest the problem is all in their heads.

However, if her concern is taken seriously - recognizing that a mother's exhaustion and eventual death are not the goalposts of a motherhood well-lived - our communal Christian response should be to affirm her concerns as valid, to outsource some of her responsibilities, and to bolster her mental and physical health.

[O]ur communal Christian response should be to affirm her concerns as valid, to outsource some of her responsibilities, and to bolster her mental and physical health.

A popular Christian healthcare sharing ministry refuses to cover the removal of an ectopic pregnancy until the unborn child dies naturally or the fallopian tube bursts, which constitutes an emergency and potentially fatal event for women. Medical guidelines that unnecessarily and unethically threaten a mother's health are just one example of the devaluation of a mother's life in the name of religion, under the incorrect assumption that death is a mother's highest calling. (This was not a Catholic healthcare provider, nor did it follow Catholic teaching, which allows the removal of a fallopian tube in an ectopic pregnancy with the intent to preserve the mother's health even though it indirectly causes the death of an unborn child.)

Recently, a friend had a conversation with her priest about the overwhelming daily sacrifice of motherhood. "Of course you are feeling despair," her priest acknowledged. Rather than berate my friend's inability to do it all, he identified her self-sufficiency as an unintended, ungodly burden of motherhood. We aren't meant to do it all, and certainly not on our own or unto death. Mothers need coworkers to accomplish the holy work entrusted to them. (Ah, that this wise priest's words could be broadcast to the world!)

Mothers need coworkers to accomplish the holy work entrusted to them.

In a secular context, the ill-presumed sacrificial nature of motherhood contributes to their marginalization.

Case in point: the absurd maternal mortality rate in our country usually elicits nothing more than a disinterested shrug and a finger-scroll to the next headline. If our callousness toward the deaths of women who are mothers is an indicator, we might ask whether motherhood is really so important to our culture. Or at the very least, why is contemporary society so comfortable with the increasing sacrificial deaths of mothers? Might it be that we don't actually view their deaths as tragic but rather, in some twisted way, as fulfillments of their ultimate purpose in life?

How many mothers are told after childbirth that incontinence, chronic pelvic pain, mood disorders, hemorrhoids, diastasis recti, prolapse, and heavy bleeding are just long term consequences of childbirth that they'll deal with for the rest of their lives?

"It's just part of motherhood," is an easier medical response than the research or funding necessary to provide better answers. Mothers are primed to accept this reasoning from a lifetime of women's healthcare that finds solutions in a combination of hormonal birth control prescriptions and the vague, catch-all diagnosis: "It's just part of womanhood, sorry."

And even in the case where medical solutions are available, how many moms don't receive "fourth trimester" care due to exhaustion, fear of seeming needy or high-maintenance, or the hassle of arranging childcare? Even among moms, it's easier to dismiss our own serious symptoms than seek care, especially if any significant expense is involved. Notably, this is an approach we would never take with our child's healthcare.

How many moms don't receive "fourth trimester" care due to exhaustion, fear of seeming needy or high-maintenance, or the hassle of arranging childcare?

There is an unnecessary shame around epidurals, antidepressants, routine counseling, physical therapy, and even thyroid medication, as if women need to apologize for not shouldering the pain that naturally accompanies the burden of their vocation.

Most moms tell jokes about how long it's been since a good night's sleep - usually years. "I'll sleep when I'm dead!"

Expectations for motherhood are often expressed as a complete sacrifice of self in service to family. While I believe these intentions are altruistic, I'm not convinced it's best for either mother or child, nor is it a prudent approach to our vocation.

Rather than viewing motherhood as a complete sacrifice of self that necessarily leads to death, it is healthier to view motherhood as a complete gift of self that, in rare cases, may require death. Whereas the first approach presumes the death of a mother to achieve its end, the second affirms the dignity of both mother and child while recognizing that the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well-being of a mother are a necessary part of being the best gift possible for her family.

"For the 'civilization of love' it is essential that the husband should recognize that the motherhood of his wife is a gift: this is enormously important for the entire process of raising children. Much will depend on his willingness to take his own part in this first stage of the gift of humanity, and to become willingly involved as a husband and father in the motherhood of his wife." (Pope John Paul II, Letter to Families 16)

Let us live out the gift of our maternal vocations with wholehearted devotion, praying to grow in the virtue of prudence so that we may discern the true good for both ourselves and our families - and choose the best means available to achieve it.

Catholic women are often held to the standard of gender stereotypes established by the world. From the domineering and childless female CEO to the demure and submissive stay-at-home mom, these stereotypes oversimplify the diversity of women throughout the world. They also ignore a salvation history that did not conform to stereotypes and expectations at all. How do we reconcile our identity as women with the stereotypes imposed on us by society? And what do we do when we’re tempted to conform our lives to the world’s expectations?

The first stereotype that comes to mind is the one (allegedly) established by our Mother herself: meek, mild, and ultra-feminine. I don’t know about you, but I’m meek and mild about 1% of the time. From the earliest years I can remember, I was a tomboy. Rather than playing hopscotch or jump-rope with the girls, I preferred to play football and capture-the-flag with the boys. My preferred uniform (when I wasn’t wearing my plaid skirt) was running shorts and a t-shirt because I was always ready for an adventure.

Even though I loved sports as a kid, I also loved school. I read every book I could get my hands on and was a straight-A student. I was never afraid to raise my hand in class or read aloud. But I also had to contend with jokes and insults like these:

“Boys are smarter than girls—it’s just a fact.”

“You’re such a bookworm. You’re never going to get a boyfriend that way.”

“I bet I can beat you in a race. You’re just a girl, after all.”

“Why are women’s feet so small? So they can stand close to the oven.”

The jokes and insults continued through high school. Classmates told me that I took myself too seriously and that, for a girl, I was too focused on getting into a good college. The comments continue to this day. Professors I encountered throughout my eight years of higher education insisted that women need to be demure and always defer to men. Others insisted that female lawyers who were too assertive in court were b*tches. A co-worker once told me that the downfall of society could be traced back to women’s entering the workforce (I’m not kidding).

What do we do when confronted by these gender stereotypes? I suggest that we acknowledge the ways they have impacted perceptions of women while also recognizing that they are just social constructs. Rather than let stereotypes dictate the way we live our vocation, let’s look to God for that inspiration.

Rather than let stereotypes dictate the way we live our vocation, let’s look to God for that inspiration.

Nonconformance with stereotypes is nothing new in the Catholic tradition. Our salvation history is filled to the brim with stereotype-busting characters who did not let the world’s expectations dictate their paths. God chose Mary, a fifteen-year-old girl, to be the mother of the Son of God. People expected her to marry Joseph and have his children; instead, she was found with child before they were married and she remained a virgin for the rest of her life. Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, came down to Earth in the form of a child, a helpless infant who needed to be nurtured and loved by a human mother. He was simultaneously a King and a sacrificial lamb, and when He didn’t live up to the world’s standards for a king, His own people demanded His crucifixion.  

When we let the world’s expectations, rather than God’s plan, dictate our lives, we deprive the world of the fullness of our feminine genius. God’s creation was not dictated by these social constructs when He formed each of us. He made every type of woman under the sun: entrepreneurs who are also stay-at-home moms, consecrated virgins, and married women who are international missionaries. These are but a few examples of the depth of femininity and the unbound possibilities for women. One is not better than the other; rather, they are co-equal expressions of God’s creativity and His love for women. When we limit ourselves to the boxes society creates for us, we allow society to be the driving force in our femininity and to constrain our feminine genius. But we are daughters of a God who is infinite in creativity and genius, and our lives should glorify this God of ours.

When we let the world’s expectations, rather than God’s plan, dictate our lives, we deprive the world of the fullness of our feminine genius.

I still can’t jump-rope. My favorite outfit is still running shorts and a t-shirt. I’m a wife and a lawyer in a field dominated by men. There will always be someone ready to tell me that women don’t belong in the workplace or the courtroom and asking me who is taking care of my (future) children. If I listen to those voices too much, I’ll let them talk me out of the vocation I was made for: wife, mother, and trial attorney.

My unique path leads to glorifying Him who created me, with all of my quirks and idiosyncrasies. I am made in the image and likeness of a God who dared to defy the world’s expectations for women in my creation. And so are you.

I have been on both ends of the NFP ministry spectrum. Just a few years ago, I was the woman who took artificial birth control with no intention of stopping. Today, I am a natural family planning (NFP) instructor who stands in front of engaged couples during their pre-Cana retreat, hoping and praying that at least one of them decides to use the beautiful tool given to them in NFP.

Since I have been a part of both groups, I draw from personal experience when I say that members of the Church could do much more in getting women and men to choose NFP.

I see the decision to choose NFP as somewhat similar to the decision to carry a pregnancy to term, rather than have an abortion. In crisis pregnancy centers, woman with an unplanned, crisis, or unwanted pregnancy need to be given hope and confidence in their ability to raise a child. If the Church is serious about promoting NFP, then women also need to be given hope and confidence in their ability to understand their bodies and their fertility.

If the Church is serious about promoting NFP, then women also need to be given hope and confidence in their ability to understand their bodies and their fertility.

We live in a time where our female bodies are a complete mystery to us. I love my mother and credit my feminism to her, but her explanation of my period when I came of age was brief and gave me no information about the science or facts. I don’t remember anything I learned in my sex education class and, even if I did, whatever I learned was probably incorrect, misleading, or both. And even though period tracking apps are ever more popular, the science behind the technology is rarely understood. For example, when I tell my non-Catholic friends that I’m a fertility awareness educator, nearly all of them mention that they love tracking their cycle on their iPhone app. It takes all I have to not shake them and scream that these apps are not the same thing as fertility awareness.

Given the importance of NFP and the current, widespread ignorance about fertility and the female body, why do we wait to educate men and women about NFP until they are engaged or married, if we educate them at all?

I’m fortunate enough to be in a diocese that requires engaged couples to take an NFP course before they can get married. I applaud my diocese for this requirement because it at least means that every couples has to hear about NFP. At the same time, teaching engaged couples about NFP during their marriage preparation is far too late.

More often that not, this requirement is one of the last boxes to be checked off, which means that too many women learn their fertility signs within a month or two of their wedding night. This is not at all the ideal amount of time to practice NFP before using it for family planning. Ask any fertility awareness instructor and they’ll tell you that it’s wise to wait at least three to six months before really getting the hang of NFP.

[T]oo many women learn their fertility signs within a month or two of their wedding night. . . . Ask any fertility awareness instructor and they’ll tell you that it’s wise to wait at least three to six months before really getting the hang of NFP.

By waiting until a woman is engaged to teach NFP to her and her fiancé, we’re essentially saying, “I want you to use this amazing product, but I’m not going to explain how it works or how you’re supposed to use it. You just have to figure it out on your own when you’re already stressed and frazzled about the million other life changes going on in your life. Cool?”

No, it’s not cool. Because of this implicit message, couples are left discouraged if they discern that getting pregnant right after the wedding isn’t best for them or their future family. The woman in particular might be afraid that she doesn’t understand her body well enough to use NFP effectively. This stems from a world that tells women that their fertility is uncontrollable and that they need to keep it in check with hormones. Since an unexpected pregnancy occurs in the woman’s body, maybe there is even a fear that any internal or external “blame” for an unexpected pregnancy would fall more on her shoulders than on her husband’s shoulders.

So, what is a holy, faithful woman to do when she isn’t confident in her ability to use NFP? Nearly all of the information in the world paints artificial birth control as a good thing, so our pro-contraception culture will make that woman feel like there is no other way to relieve her fears but to take the Pill, get an implant, insert an IUD, or use any number of other options that contradict Church teaching.

Nearly all of the information in the world paints artificial birth control as a good thing, so our pro-contraception culture will make that woman feel like there is no other way to relieve her fears

And I haven’t even touched on the lack of community in the Church if a woman does decide to learn and use NFP. There are no supportive environments (like La Leche League) with monthly meetings for charting. Can you imagine how great it would be to have regular, in-person meetings with general fertility topic discussions and a safe space to ask questions or share challenges? Wouldn’t it be wonderful to have a group of experienced NFP users offering suggestions from their own experience to newbies? I can only hope that this is the sort of environment my future daughter gets to be a part of in the Church - and ladies, we have the opportunity today to start creating this environment.

Since I’m so new to both the Church and NFP, I don’t want to give the impression that I know what’s best. What I would like to see most is us to start having open and honest conversations about how we can improve NFP education in the Church. I am desperately hungry for these kinds of discussions. I would love to hear your thoughts, ideas, and resources so that we can empower women to be confident in the choices related to their bodies and fertility.

“But really what was most beautiful was the sense of 400 women taking a deep breath because they knew that for one day they didn't have to fight. They didn't have to walk the line between Catholic and feminist. They weren't going to be called right-wing bigots or liberal morons. I'm sure they were many differences of opinion in that room, but we all had the same basic sense that we are desperately loved by God and called to promote the equal dignity of women and men.” - Meg Hunter-Kilmer

For about two or three years now, I have called myself a feminist - somewhat openly on social media, not as openly in my daily conversations. I will occasionally share articles I read on my Facebook feed, though I’d rather discuss issues through private messages or in a private online forum.

Why am I a bit quiet about being a feminist? I’m proud to be a feminist, but my non-confrontational nature and loathing of faceless Facebook arguments stops me from sharing my feminism too loudly. I often feel like I am too quiet anyway, so if I did speak, would anyone care enough to actually hear what I have to say?

On Saturday, March 2nd, I stepped into a room with 400 other women who call themselves Catholic feminists and, much like how Meg described, I took a deep breath and relaxed because I didn’t have to be on guard. Here, I didn’t have to defend myself. Here, I didn’t have to bite my tongue because I overheard or read something that labeled all feminists as faithless, pro-choice misandrists. Here, I could breathe freely.

It felt like going to a family gathering. I didn’t have a chance to speak to more than a small fraction of the women present, but it felt like I knew everyone there. Everyone was familiar. I looked around at all of the pregnant mothers, the mothers openly and beautifully breastfeeding during talks, the newly married wives, the single women, the older women, the younger women - and I felt like I belonged. There was a strong, vibrant sense of community, joy, and life.

There was a strong, vibrant sense of community, joy, and life.

There was no “subversive agenda.” There were no cries for the downfall of men or rants about the #patriarchy as we burned our bras. There were no women running around, proclaiming that their husbands and boyfriends needed to realize that women are the superior gender. I know, sadly, that there are many people who think we feminists are like that. I wish that anyone who does could have seen what I saw at the FemCatholic Conference.

For it was full of women speaking to women and men about the beauty of being a woman. Women speaking about the incredible ways in which our bodies were created and how we are uplifted by our biology, not chained or oppressed by it. Women sharing their personal experiences of being Catholic, of being single, of being married, of being wives, mothers, teachers, and missionaries. Women celebrating the beauty of Catholic teaching and how it celebrates womanhood. Women going beyond the surface of phrases like “the feminine genius” to discover their truth and beauty. Women who were so varied in their different backgrounds and life experiences, and yet still united in their passion for womankind and all humanity.

Women who were so varied in their different backgrounds and life experiences, and yet still united in their passion for womankind and all humanity.

I shared briefly and quietly that, since the 2016 elections and the countless stories of sexual abuse that have come out since August, I am not entirely sure where I am in my faith. I grew up with a fire for my faith as a child, but I am still navigating how to translate that faith into adulthood. How can I love what the Church teaches while at the same time being dismayed and discouraged by the people that I see in the Church who don’t seem to live what they say they believe? I was met with nods of understanding and support by women who knew exactly what I meant. Women whose hearts are also troubled and are going through their own journeys of faith.

I left feeling inspired and renewed. I left knowing that I had to take my beliefs and convictions and start living them more openly. I don’t know how I will do that yet, but with the strength of so many women around me, I know that I will find my way forward and discover how I can share my gifts with the world.

“Thank you, every woman, for the simple fact of being a woman! Through the insight which is so much a part of your womanhood you enrich the world's understanding and help to make human relations more honest and authentic.” - Saint John Paul II

Warning: this article discusses pregnancy and infant loss.

‍

“We are not monsters.”

This isn’t the first line of the open letter posted on AbortionPatients.com, but I almost wish it were. The website is a response to controversy over recent reproductive health bills introduced in Virginia and New York that would expand abortion access to women in need of “late-term abortions” after 24 weeks, in cases involving fetal viability after birth and/or a danger to the mother’s health.

Some pro-life doctors and thought leaders feverishly claimed that late-term abortion is never, ever necessary. Some pro-choice doctors disagreed. The Catholic internet (and America’s internet in general) erupted into debates. Are women casually asking their doctors to kill their children just a few moments before birth? Are doctors gleefully watching babies suffocate to death?

Statistically, this is not the case, with the most recent CDC data stating that only 1.3% of abortions take place after 21 weeks, and of those, all are medically indicated. "Medically indicated" seems to be an undefinable range, somewhere between fetal abnormalities (that may or may not be fatal) and severe pregnancy complications that could be physical or mental.

What is certainly clear is the tangible heartbreak in stories from later-abortion patients. While some pro-life advocates are almost entirely dismissed as out of touch and ignorant, the Catholic perspective on bioethics, especially combined with a feminist ethic, has much to offer women and families discerning how to respond to serious pregnancy complications.

[T]he Catholic perspective on bioethics, especially combined with a feminist ethic, has much to offer women and families discerning how to respond to serious pregnancy complications.

I wish I could tell every woman in this situation that I believe her when she says that she is not a monster. I believe these women are just like me: sisters, mothers, and friends trying to do the best they can in very difficult situations.

And so we must believe our sisters, holding them with grace and mercy. As pro-life advocates, there is space for both supporting and challenging women during discussions on abortion. But we can only challenge effectively after we have seriously grappled with the complex issues involved. Here are 10 considerations we need to keep in mind.

1. “Late-term abortion” is not a medical term.*

Let's stop using it in our think-pieces (it pains me to use it in this one). When we discuss issues surrounding abortion, it's vital to know the full meaning of the terms we use. And to that end...

2. In medical terminology, "abortion" is a broad term that refers to more than you might think.*

Medically speaking, abortion is not solely birth control that kills a living baby. It is a surgical procedure that can help save lives in necessary situations. Imagine being pregnant. You’re 12 weeks along. Everything has been fine thus far. You’re excited. And then, at your next ultrasound appointment, you receive the most awful news: there is no heartbeat. Your provider tells you the baby’s remains need to be removed, and that it is a medical necessity for your health.

Whether this hypothetical woman undergoes a D&E/D&C, a D&X, induction of labor in the hospital or at home, or a c-section, in a medical sense, it is an abortion procedure and will be medically charted as such. In this instance, it is a spontaneous abortion completely independent philosophically and ethically from an induced, elective abortion used as a form of birth control when the baby is still alive. But the procedure performed is still an abortion and considered an abortion-related death. It is critical that pro-lifers, especially those crafting legislation, understand that in medical terms, abortion is sometimes necessary in situations of pregnancy loss.

3. Medical terminology and practice do not account for theology.

When the bills were first introduced, pro-life responses all over the country exclaimed, “Abortion isn’t healthcare.” As mentioned up above, yes it is, though perhaps only on a technicality.

Many pro-lifers also claimed that late-term abortion is never necessary, even in cases when a mother’s health is at risk. As an allied health professional that attends births for a living, I agree 100% with their ethical rationale - but not with their medical accuracy. It is incorrect to say that late-term abortion is never necessary when, medically speaking, any early “interruption” or termination of a pregnancy (even in miscarriage) is considered an abortion.

It is incorrect to say that late-term abortion is never necessary when, medically speaking, any early “interruption” or termination of a pregnancy (even in miscarriage) is considered an abortion.

Consider a woman who is 30 weeks along in pregnancy and receives a fatal fetal diagnosis such as anencephaly, where a baby’s brain does not form properly. Most likely, this mother will be informed that her baby will not live very long outside the womb. She will be given the choice between abortion now or delivery later at full-term.

If she has any other life-threatening condition, such as preeclampsia, or if there is any pregnancy complication that could make waiting for delivery more dangerous (such as placenta previa), her doctor will suggest direct abortion now rather than waiting for delivery and the child's natural death.

Ethically, she could choose an immediate induction of labor or c-section, which would result in the child's natural death instead of direct death. To be clear, even in this instance, early induction or c-section resulting in the natural death of a child would still be medically considered an abortion. Many medical providers - informed more by health risks than by pro-life ethics - would strongly suggest direct abortion, since it carries fewer potential complications for the mother.

One pro-life solution is to lobby to change medical terminology to exclude miscarriage and early induction of labor or c-section from the definition of "abortion," although the probability of this happening is doubtful. However, an important step that is often overlooked in the legal approach to this issue is the need to change women’s health care and maternity care to better allow for life-affirming choices (see points 5, 6, and 7 below).

One pro-life solution is to lobby to change medical terminology to exclude miscarriage and early induction of labor or c-section from the definition of "abortion"

4. In cases where a woman’s health is at risk, labor induction or pregnancy “interruption” - even though it results in the death of a child - can be considered ethical perinatal hospice care.

Dr. Jen Gunter, “Twitter’s Resident Gynecologist,” writes extensively on late-term abortion. She and many other pro-choice advocates don’t understand what seem like uninformed pro-life arguments, since even a c-section for a non-viable pregnancy is still considered abortion. Why would we want to legislate that? Again, while she is correct in a medical sense, she overlooks the ethical dilemma.

Catholic teaching prohibits the direct killing of any human life, yet allows for “legitimate defense”: if medically treating a woman unintentionally causes the death of her unborn child, there is no moral wrong. For example, take the case of ectopic pregnancy, a life-threatening situation where an embryo implanted in the fallopian tube instead of the uterus. The treatment for ectopic pregnancy (removing a portion of the fallopian tube) saves the mother’s life, but ends the pregnancy. The intention is not to kill the baby; it is to save the mother. In the context of abortion, a pregnant woman whose life depends on an early induction of labor or a c-section - which would result in the death of a baby - could ethically pursue early induction or a c-section, according to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services (ERD):

"Operations, treatments, and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted when they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable, even if they will result in the death of the unborn child."

Catholic teaching offers considerations for ordinary versus extraordinary means to save or sustain a person’s life. There is no moral imperative to take on extraordinary means, which do not offer sufficient health benefits to the patient or may cause an excessive burden or expense for the family. From the same document on ordinary and extraordinary means:

"A person may forgo extraordinary or disproportionate means of preserving life. Disproportionate means are those that in the patient’s judgment do not offer a reasonable hope of benefit or entail an excessive burden, or impose excessive expense on the family or the community."

In cases where a family is not able to afford several weeks or months of NICU care for a baby that is not likely to survive, they are not morally required to choose this health care option, nor should they be made to feel guilty for this decision. Perinatal hospice care, where a baby is treated with dignity and a family is given the space and necessary means to process and grieve, is a Catholic answer to this problem.

Perinatal hospice care, where a baby is treated with dignity and a family is given the space and necessary means to process and grieve, is a Catholic answer to this problem.

5. There are several reasons why perinatal hospice care doesn’t happen in every case where it could or should.

Perinatal hospice care is not the norm in every hospital. While delaying induction or c-section is not always medically possible, the option for perinatal hospice is sometimes not presented, and women may not know that they can ask for it.

Some providers are unfamiliar with perinatal hospice. Others might assume that the most compassionate choice for both mother and baby is to deal with fetal viability cases as quickly and efficiently as possible with direct abortion. This could be compared to euthanasia, causing death in order to alleviate suffering, which is never ethically permissible. According to the ERD, there are moral alternatives to euthanasia, which could also support parents as they make choices for their unborn child with a fatal diagnosis:

"Dying patients who request euthanasia should receive loving care, psychological and spiritual support, and appropriate remedies for pain and other symptoms so that they can live with dignity until the time of natural death."

In my work as a doula, I meet clients at various points in their parenting journeys. Some have previously experienced fetal demise and stillbirth pregnancies and, of these, many express sorrow that they do not “know where their children are.” Some parents weren't given the opportunity to see their children’s remains. They weren't presented with any options for hospice or burial. The doubt and resulting trauma, the fear of having “failed” to protect their children, is excruciating for them and can require years of psychological and spiritual healing. Perinatal hospice needs to be a more accessible option in our healthcare system.

6. There are simply not enough resources for families that receive a diagnosis of a fatal fetal abnormality or a pregnancy complication where abortion is the first line of medical defense.

In cases where a woman receives an unexpected diagnosis, especially a fatal fetal diagnosis, things have a tendency to go right over her head. What did the doctor say? What was that statistic? Why did the nurse look at me like that? What was she trying to say?

It is so important to give parents time and direct support to make medical decisions. Every diocese should have a well-funded and well-trained pregnancy loss ministry, perhaps as part of their overall diocesan pro-life ministry. Train women as bereavement doulas to minister directly to other women. Publicly address this need within our parish communities. What should a family do if they receive such a diagnosis? Who are they supposed to call?

Every diocese should have a well-funded and well-trained pregnancy loss ministry, perhaps as part of their overall diocesan pro-life ministry.

Christian and Catholic medical communities need to take the lead on this matter, conducting new research on the efficacy of perinatal hospice care, as well as introducing new papers to relevant medical journals and medical bodies, such as the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG).

There is also a need for serious retraining of medical and nursing staff on how to deal with these difficult situations in the delivery room. While there are amazing stories of compassionate care, this isn't always the case. I was recently informed of a woman who experienced a stillbirth and is still traumatized by a young medical resident’s enthusiastic excitement about the opportunity to perform genetic testing, even as the child's family was mourning their loss within earshot in the same room. Sadly, this is not the worst story I’ve heard.

7. We must challenge ableism at every opportunity.

We need to eliminate the phrase, “I just want a healthy baby.” This feeds the mentality that an unhealthy baby is unwanted and it supports a culture that devalues those with disabilities. Consider what kind of life and opportunities are available to a person with disabilities in America. Consider healthcare, therapy, education, and employment. Consider the support systems available for families of those with disabilities. Does our culture reflect the fundamental pro-life value that every person - including those with chronic health problems or disabilities, including the unborn facing a life with these conditions - is created with purpose and deserving of the dignity that obliges? If a woman believes that euthanasia is a better choice for her unborn baby than life with a disability in the United States of America, we need to do some serious self-reflection as a country.

When we create a culture that values disabled and abled people as equal, we will have created a culture that is more open to celebrating all life, especially when facing a difficult fetal diagnosis.

8. In order to change the “Culture of Death,” we need to acknowledge some uncomfortable history.

There is one line of pro-life thinking tantamount to a disenchanted, “How did we get here? How did we get to the point of debating whether a newborn should have access to medical care?” If you’re wondering how the medical community “got here,” you need to crack open a history book. Experimentation. Disenfranchisement. I could go on, but the point is that we’ve been here.

Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s blackface photos were taken in medical school in 1979. I, a former fetus (and a black one at that), was born in 1988. Northam still would have been in his residency by the time I was born. Unchecked and clearly unchallenged several decades later, he’s now arguing for infanticide. But the fact is, none of us should really be surprised when the cusp of his medical career included mocking a vulnerable population of the American citizenry. It was black people then, why shouldn’t it be babies now? The medical community has always needed to be checked by ethics, philosophy and, yes, articulate people of faith.

9. This issue is bigger than whether abortion is legal or illegal.

We need to recognize the various complexities of the abortion issue: that the medical language of abortion affects miscarriage protocol as well as the medical options available for saving a pregnant mother's life; that it begs the expansion of perinatal hospice knowledge and accessibility; that it's reflective of larger cultural issues around chronic health problems and disability care; and that it requires understanding ordinary versus extraordinary care for medically frail infants (recognizing that palliative care short of extraordinary means is ethically permissible and in no way the same as euthanasia). Given the complication of this issue, the seemingly simple solution to "make abortion illegal" is a red herring.

We will see a shift in the choices that women make when they are empowered in their health journeys prenatally, during pregnancy, and postpartum. It’s why women who are given time, options, and ultrasounds usually choose life when facing an unplanned pregnancy.

We will see a shift in the choices that women make when they are empowered in their health journeys prenatally, during pregnancy, and postpartum.

10. Collective confusion over abortion is a symptom of a greater problem.

It is indeed disheartening to be in a culture that is so confused about the sanctity of every human life. Herein lies the confusion we see with abortion, where sometimes a pregnancy loss is a baby lucky enough to spend his last moments being held by his mother and father. But across the hall or across the country, another family's pregnancy loss might be treated as nothing more than a bad dental appointment.

Who are we supposed to believe? I suggest that we start with women, with or without faith, who face these issues every day.

As for the Church, more clear guidance and understanding is needed on end-of-life decisions. More spiritual and practical support at the diocesan and parish level is needed for perinatal hospice care. Catholic feminists can play an important role in shaping this guidance by declaring and insisting upon a fundamental understanding by the pro-life movement within the Church that women are not monsters. Indeed, they are not, and it is our responsibility to ensure that women’s voices are treated with respect, all the while remembering our duty to protect every human life.

*Editor's Note: Updated on 4/1/19. Following thoughtful feedback from one of our readers, we changed the phrasing of these points to better clarify our meaning.

In the realms of business, academia, and professional development, mentorship is a common practice. Companies and institutions often use mentoring as a means to provide employees with education, navigation for their field’s challenges, and opportunities to grow in skills and self-awareness. Mentoring is found across disciplines: aspiring social workers intern under the guidance of an experienced supervisor to begin practicing in the field, teaching assistants learn what life as a professor entails, and less experienced business associates are taken under the wing of more experienced employees. Ideally, mentorship provides a space in which a new person is encouraged to find their own identity, and is connected to a larger network of support within a field.

Mentorship does not have to be connected to corporate or professional structures to be helpful; in fact, finding a spiritual mentor can be immensely beneficial to your faith life.

In recent months, the Catholic Church has taken notice of the effective practice of mentorship and preached its value to those who wish to grow in their faith. Furthermore, mentorship has always been present in Catholic tradition: Christians sought the guidance of the Desert Fathers and Mothers in the early Church; women and men seeking entrance into religious orders were and still are introduced to a new vocation through the help of formators; and people seeking Baptism or full communion with the Catholic Church continue to be guided into the Catholic Faith through the presence of godparents and sponsors.

Discussions about the application of mentorship to spirituality, especially in regards to Catholic tradition, brought about the term ‘accompaniment.’ Accompaniment is the one-on-one ministry of guidance, wisdom, and friendship between a mentor and mentee, oriented towards growth in relationship with Christ that results in a sense of and response to mission. In other words, through being accompanied by a mentor, the mentee grows in holiness by gaining awareness of her own gifts and the movements of the Holy Spirit in her life; she then responds to this awareness by living as a Christian in an intentional and unique way.  The word accompaniment has deeply Christian connotations, hearkening back to the way in which Jesus ministered to and formed his followers in the Gospels.

[T]hrough being accompanied by a mentor, the mentee grows in holiness by gaining awareness of her own gifts and the movements of the Holy Spirit in her life

Accompaniment and spiritual mentoring describe a formative, intentional relationship initiated by the mentee and oriented towards Christ that empower the mentee to live a life of personal mission. Through mutual reflection between mentor and mentee upon divine action in the mentee’s life experiences, the mentee grows in her ability to recognize and respond to the action of God in her life. In accompaniment, a more experienced mentor offers wisdom to a less experienced mentee in a collaborative way, and uses her own life experiences to inform the guidance she offers to her mentee. Seeking a mentor through a relationship of accompaniment can produce substantial fruit in your spiritual life.

Spiritual Mentorship Between Women

Spiritual mentorship between women is a particularly beneficial practice; accompaniment can provide exclusively female spaces of trust, honesty, witness, and authenticity. Through establishing a relationship with a more seasoned Catholic woman, a younger or less spiritually developed Catholic woman can gain wisdom from someone who has “been there” in career, vocation, and/or motherhood. In a culture and Church that can often dismiss women’s voices, female spiritual mentorship creates a context in which women can learn to trust their own voice, solidify their identity, and be affirmed in their value and personhood. Especially in spiritual settings that prioritize the voices and role of men to pass on spiritual teaching and wisdom, a female relationship of accompaniment invites women to grow in authority and ownership of their faith, which then fosters a place for reflection on the Holy Spirit’s activity in the lives of women.

[A] female relationship of accompaniment invites women to grow in authority and ownership of their faith

Spiritual mentorship also provides a means by which women can holistically integrate the different facets of their life. In a woman’s wide variety of day-to-day life experiences - such as being a mother, academic, entrepreneur, friend, daughter, or sister - the Holy Spirit calls to her. With the help of the mentor’s perspective, the mentee can identify the Spirit’s movements and voice that calls to her through relationships, passions and “side-hustles”, personal strengths and weaknesses, wounds and personal failings, and hopes for the future. Accompaniment forms women in their faith and strengthens their relationship with Christ, while empowering them to follow the will of God in all aspects of their life.

How to Find a Spiritual Mentor

If it sounds like spiritual mentoring could be beneficial for you, you might be wondering where to start in finding the right mentor. Here are a few tips to help you get started:

1. Identify what you need.

Ask yourself what it is that you need in a relationship of spiritual mentoring. Do you need help in discerning a big life choice? Are you stuck in your pursuit of doing God’s will? Are you looking for help in a life transition? Do you seek a new way to grow in your faith? Take these questions to prayer and try to be specific as possible when recognizing your needs and hopes for a mentoring relationship.

2. Think of possible mentors.

Based on the needs you identified, brainstorm a few women who you think might be good mentors. If you are discerning a particular life choice, consider women who live the lifestyle, career, or vocation you are considering. If you want to grow more generally in your faith, call your local diocese and ask for a list of women trained in spiritual direction. Ask friends, colleagues, and relatives for women they’d recommend, or email your diocesan young adult office about what you’re hoping for and ask for ideas. If you’re stuck, attend an event where you think you might meet women in person who would be well-suited to mentor you. Seek out Catholic women’s conferences, women’s ministries and groups at parishes or universities, or Catholic networking meet-ups. Finally, make a list of two or three women who would be best suited to assist you.

When considering a mentor, keep in mind their time, availability, and accessibility. For a truly fruitful mentoring relationship, it is ideal find someone who is not overbooked with professional or familial commitments, who is located near you (or willing to mentor you at a distance), and who is someone who you could somewhat easily contact to meet up for coffee or drinks after work. Though you might not know the woman you’d like to ask well, it is also helpful to aim for someone that you feel comfortable being yourself with. Remember: if your first choice of a mentor does not work out, it’s possible to try again!

3. Craft your initial ask.

For many women, asking someone to be their mentor is daunting, as mentorship is a vague word that means different things to different people. You can begin your mentoring relationship slowly with asking for help on specific, concrete things. For example, instead of asking the female Catholic professor you admire to “mentor you” out of the blue, you could visit her during office hours to ask for her feedback or help with research, or you could invite her to coffee and ask for specific advice from her life as a Catholic, female academic.

4. Reflect and evaluate.

Based on the concrete things you asked for in your initial meeting, was the woman you met with helpful? Can you see yourself relating well to her? Do you feel reasonably comfortable voicing questions, doubts, or concerns with her? If not, regroup. Finding a great mentor does not always happen quickly.

5. Craft your mentorship proposal.

If the meeting went well, great! It’s time to think about formulating a “mentorship proposal.” Decide what mentorship means to you, taking into account the needs and goals you identified at the beginning of this process. Think about concrete factors that your possible mentor may ask about. Consider questions such as: What do I mean by spiritual mentorship? To what degree am I comfortable talking about my spirituality and life with someone? How long do I need to be mentored? How often do we meet? What do our meetings look like? How do I bring what I need into the mentoring relationship: is it by checking in each week via email, or coming to our meeting equipped with questions or talking points? What resources might be helpful to us? Are there any connections to resources or people that I would like to ask my mentor for?

6. Pop the question.

After two or three times grabbing coffee or drinks to discuss the specific requests you made, you will hopefully feel more comfortable asking her to be your mentor. Begin by describing your identified needs or goals and your desire to be mentored. Then, clarify what you mean by “mentoring” by indicating things like the length of your relationship and frequency of meetings. Give the person you’re asking time to consider their own availability, if necessary.

7. Begin the relationship

Once you find a mentor who accepts your proposal, set a precedent in the relationship with your active participation. Think of questions and topics of discussion to bring to your meetings, and ask to pray with your mentor. Outside of your meetings, actively engage in your own spiritual growth through prayer, reception of the Sacraments, reflecting on your experiences, involvement in your parish, and service to the marginalized. Be clear in your communication with your mentor and if there is a need to end the mentoring relationship, be upfront and respect their time.

Accompaniment and spiritual mentoring provide a space for Catholic women to grow in faith, be affirmed in their identity and voice, and take an active role in following the Holy Spirit. If you feel stagnant in your spiritual life, are considering a lifestyle or career change, or hope to further develop your unique identity as a Catholic woman, having a spiritual mentor will assist you in seeing God’s plan for you more clearly.

Countless women have transformed the world through their individual gifts, creativity, and witness because they mentored and were themselves mentored spiritually. St. Edith Stein became Catholic after learning about the witness of St. Teresa of Avila. St. Zelie provided a home where her children grew in sanctity. St. Frances of Rome’s example motivated other lay women of her time to serve the poor. St. Joan of Arc was moved to follow God’s will through the prayers and inspiration of Sts. Margaret of Antioch and Catherine of Alexandria. Consider in prayer how God may be inviting you to grow in relationship with His Son through the Holy Spirit through being accompanied by a spiritual mentor.

In his 1988 encyclical, Mulieris Dignitatem (“On the Dignity and Vocation of Women”), Pope St. John Paul II first taught us about what he calls the “feminine genius”:

The Church gives thanks for all the manifestations of the feminine “genius” which have appeared in the course of history, in the midst of all peoples and nations; she gives thanks for all the charisms which the Holy Spirit distributes to women in the history of the People of God, for all the victories she owes to their faith, hope and charity: she gives thanks for all the fruits of feminine holiness. (Mulieries Dignitatem 31)

What are these “fruits of feminine holiness” that make up the feminine genius? What gifts has the Holy Spirit distributed to women? As a synthesis of his ideas on the feminine genius, Mary Jo Anderson provided her interpretation of John Paul II's work in 2005* and identified four possible aspects of the feminine genius: receptivity, sensitivity, generosity and maternity.

While these aspects were not defined by John Paul II himself, this interpretation of the feminine genius can provide one helpful starting point for reflection. The world needs women, including in the workplace. In the United States, almost half of the labor force is female. And yet, we also know that women are less represented in leadership positions. As Catholic women, we can bring awareness of the feminine genius to our workplaces and push for leadership roles so that men and women can bring their gifts equally to the organizations where we work. Based on the aspects of the feminine genius, here are what women in particular bring to the table.

Receptivity

Receptivity is sometimes misunderstood as passivity, but the two are not synonymous. Mary, whom we can look to as the paragon of feminine genius, was receptive but certainly not passive. When she was given the choice to receive Jesus, her fiat was an active acceptance of God’s will. We can also say yes to our vocation, both our state of life (religious, married, or single) and our career (teacher, sales manager, writer, surgeon, etc.). By discerning the best way to use the particular gifts we received, we demonstrate receptivity.

We can also be receptive to others. Edith Stein (also known as St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross) wrote that women “must consider others as gifts entrusted to her. . . This will come about only if she considers and prepares herself as God’s instrument.” We must receive God’s love and then transmit it to others. Any job that “is conducted with other people, at least with others in the same room,” provides us with “an immediate opportunity . . . for development of all feminine virtues.”

Any job that “is conducted with other people, at least with others in the same room,” provides us with “an immediate opportunity . . . for development of all feminine virtues.”

Women also have the ability and opportunity to improve the workplace with our receptivity. How much better would your workplace be if every person in it were more receptive to others’ feelings and experiences? How much would your workplace improve if just one person in it were more receptive to others’ feelings and experiences?

I am not always good at being that one person. I think digital communication, where there’s no voice and no face, makes it easy to depersonalize the other person. Recently, I have tried to be more receptive to the others, even if I can’t see or hear them. They are a child of God, just like I am, and we both have inherent value and dignity. Being receptive means listening to others, and really hearing them, accordingly.

Sensitivity

“Don’t be so sensitive!”

As someone who cries easily (from any emotion, whether sadness, anger, or joy), I’ve heard this comment before. It is true that being overly sensitive or easily offended isn’t good. However, that’s not what sensitivity really means. For women, sensitivity means taking our receptivity, our “tuning in” to other people, and bringing it to the logical next step: responding. Being sensitive means identifying when a co-worker is having a bad day and not reaming him out over a mistake. Being sensitive means seeing the struggle a new manager has adjusting to her role and company, and then helping her learn the culture.

For women, sensitivity means taking our receptivity, our “tuning in” to other people, and bringing it to the logical next step: responding.

Susan Cain describes sensitive people in her book Quiet:

They dislike small talk. They often describe themselves as creative or intuitive. They dream vividly, and can often recall their dreams the next day. They love music, nature, art, physical beauty. They feel exceptionally strong emotions - sometimes acute bouts of joy, but also sorrow, melancholy, and fear. Highly sensitive people also process information about their environments - both physical and emotional - unusually deeply. They tend to notice subtleties that others miss - another person’s shift in mood, say, or a lightbulb burning a touch too brightly. (136)

Going with this definition of sensitivity, imagine how creativity, intuition, deep processing of information and subtleties, and appreciation of art and beauty could impact the workplace. For example, I work with very artistic, creative people. Several of us are musicians and we also have artists and actors on our team. We’re also mostly women. Our office is filled with creativity and art. We have an entire wall of photos, one for each employee, and they aren’t standard headshots: they’re creative photos that capture our personalities in some way (mine, for example, is of me hiding most of my face behind Jane Austen’s Emma, my favorite book). Seeing each person’s personality shine through these photos is a way of bringing the office closer together and making us better colleagues - and even friends.

Generosity

“Generosity, in particular, is a spiritual attitude and attribute that is needed in the marketplace and one that women possess in a special way,” writes Anne Costa in her book Embracing Edith Stein (58). Costa says that servant leadership, “combined with the feminine gifts God” (60) gave her, led to a satisfying career that she views as a vocation.

Servant leadership is a unique approach described as “a philosophy and set of practices that enriches the lives of individuals, builds better organizations and ultimately creates a more just and caring world.” A person who exercises servant leadership “focuses primarily on the growth and well-being of people and the communities to which they belong.”

This type of leadership evokes aspects of the feminine genius. It’s also a highly effective way to lead people, teams, and organizations - and it requires generosity, or acting in someone else’s best interest, even if it’s not in our own.

Servant leadership is . . . a highly effective way to lead people, teams, and organizations - and it requires generosity.

Our generosity may be especially needed in the modern economy. As Mary Jo Anderson writes for Catholic Answers, women’s “natural generosity, a weapon against dehumanizing scientism, is manifested when women emphasize the social and ethical dimensions to balance the scientific and technological advancements of mankind.”

As technology touches every aspect of every industry, how much more important it is that women are well represented! Unfortunately, we know this is not yet the case. The nature of many tech workplace cultures demonstrates a lack of feminine genius, which drives women away when they could improve the workplace

Maternity

“Not all women are mothers,” you might say. “What about the single women? The childless married women? The religious?” Not to mention the fact that too many people seem to believe that motherhood and career are in direct opposition to each other. Given all of this, how does maternity come into play at work?

The feminine genius isn’t exclusive to physical motherhood. It encompasses what, in his 1995 Letter to Women, John Paul II describes as an “affective, cultural and spiritual motherhood which has inestimable value for the development of individuals and the future of society” (9). He was specifically referring to educators, but I believe most, if not all, careers can benefit from this motherhood, which might manifest itself in other types of relationships.

[M]ost, if not all, careers can benefit from this [affective, cultural, and spiritual] motherhood

We can serve as a mentor to the new employee, fresh out of college, who isn’t sure how to interact with her manager or co-workers. We can teach our desk-mate how to use a new piece of software. We can accept and respect the diversity of opinions, perspectives and backgrounds that our team mates bring to the office. We can nurture life, growth, and development. As Costa writes, “Ultimately, women’s maternity bears fruit when we carry Christ to others.”

Women: Our Intrinsic Value

Edith Stein wrote that “[t]he intrinsic value of woman consists essentially in exceptional receptivity for God’s work in the soul, and this value comes to unalloyed development if we abandon ourselves confidently and unresistingly to this work” (Essays on Woman 259). Through the gifts we are given as daughters of God, we can be His tools at work - regardless of our vocation, industry, job, or title.

This article is part of a series on how we can live out the feminine genius in the workplace, focused on four aspects: receptivity, sensitivity, generosity, and maternity.

*Editor's Note: Updated on 5/3/19. Following feedback from and research by our readers, we corrected the source of the four aspects of the feminine genius. These aspects were neither identified nor defined by Pope St. John Paul II himself. Rather, they are an interpretation and synthesis of his work. Our best research shows that these four aspects were first described by Mary Jo Anderson in a 2005 article for Catholic Answers Magazine.

Today, on International Women’s Day, there is one message I want to share with you:

Do not be afraid.

You need not be afraid of being different from man.
You need not be afraid of an active emotional life.
You need not be afraid of being too outspoken or too quiet.
You need not be afraid if you don’t feel feminine - nothing can change the fact that you were created as a woman.
You need not be afraid if aspects of the feminine genius don't resonate with you - the feminine genius is far more deep and profound than we can understand, and you have it in you, even if we don't know yet how to explain it fully.
You need not be afraid of suffering - look at the women who met Christ on the road to Calvary.
You need not be afraid of the masculine traits you possess - growth in holiness can mean that we demonstrate the virtues of man and woman.
You need not be afraid of an unplanned or crisis pregnancy - you are strong, and we will support you (seriously, please contact us).
You need not be afraid of infertility - nothing can reduce your femininity or capacity to be maternal, however you live that out.
You need not be afraid of asking hard questions - the Church can handle it and the Truth will remain as it has always been.

And, for the record, you need not be ashamed of any of that, either.

God willed that human beings should exist in two sexes: man and woman. Though woman was created second, she was not an afterthought - because God does not have afterthoughts. Though woman was created second, she is not inferior - because God willed woman for her own sake.

If God desired that woman should exist, then we know it is good to be a woman. Not only did God desire woman to exist, He desired that you, specifically, should exist. And as we grow closer to Him, He will reveal to us all of the goodness that lies in our creation.

The world we live in can be loud, raucous, and distracting. With the influx of technology, it seems as though noise awaits us around every corner. Against the backdrop of all this noise, we might overlook silence as a way to encounter God—and maybe even fear it.

My typical day goes like this: the alarm beeps at 6:30AM to wake me up for work. An hour later, I get into my car and turn on the radio to listen to Christian music during my commute. As soon as I walk into the office, my computer dings, alerting me to emails, and my office phone rings throughout the day. After work, the radio comes back on as I head to the gym, where I either watch Netflix or listen to Spotify during my workout. My husband and I watch an episode or two of The Office or Parks and Recreation before heading to bed around 11:00PM. The next morning, it starts all over again.

I recently noticed how inundated with noise the world and my life have become, and now I look for any opportunity to go off the grid and escape the noise. I went skiing a few weeks ago, seeking quiet time and an encounter with God in the natural beauty of Creation. As I waited to board the chair lift, I noticed that most of the people skiing (either by themselves or with others) were wearing headphones. I got on the chair lift and the people sitting next to me were listening to the Beatles on Spotify. I love the Beatles just as much as the next person, but this was my first Beatles-themed ride up the mountain. There we were, surrounded by snow-covered trees, pristine snow, and the rushing sound of the wind – with a Beatles soundtrack. This wasn’t exactly how I pictured my morning skiing, but the experience made me wonder about our culture’s – dare I say it – obsession with noise.

I recently noticed how inundated with noise the world and my life have become

I thought about this experience during the forty-minute drive back down the mountain.  Interestingly enough, I had decided to turn off the radio on my way home so I could enjoy the sound of the world. I realized how much I enjoyed the silence and began to wonder about other ways I could eliminate unnecessary noise in my life. Providentially, my husband, David, was just about to start Exodus 90. If you’re unfamiliar with Exodus 90, it’s a challenge for Catholic men that requires them to give up a multitude of creature comforts for the ninety days preceding Easter. Such comforts include desserts, alcohol, snacks, hot showers, the Internet, and TV. The goal is to untangle yourself from the distractions of the world and refocus on God.

When David first told me about this challenge, I was skeptical, yet intrigued. I decided to do a mini version of the challenge and see how I would fare. One week in, I realized that I use noise to drown out God’s voice, especially when I feel like I’m falling short spiritually. The noise is convenient at those times because it provides a momentary distraction from the deep questions whose very presence exhausts you. Am I following my vocation as a lawyer? What are my next steps? When should we think about starting our family? How do I make that work with full-time legal work? The first week of my revised Exodus 90 forced me to confront these questions, among others, and to reflect on the encounters with God I have intentionally or accidentally drowned out over the years.

The first week of my revised Exodus 90 forced me to confront [hard] questions . . . and to reflect on the encounters with God I have intentionally or accidentally drowned out over the years.

The Oxford Dictionary defines silence as “the complete absence of sound.” This makes silence seem empty because it highlights what is absent, rather than what is present. Silence provides the opportunity for a rich and vulnerable encounter with God. As our world becomes noisier and we become inundated with more technology, God is steadily edged out in favor of that noise which satisfies us immediately (e.g. our favorite TV show or podcast). If we aren’t careful, we can spend more time listening to this noise than we do encountering God. While silence is not the only way to do this, it is an excellent way to develop our personal relationship with God and restore Him as the focal point of our lives.

As we enter the season of Lent, I challenge you to honestly ask yourself if noise drowns out God’s voice in your life, as it did in mine.  I challenge you to escape the noise of the world (to the best of your ability) and be silent, if for no other reason than to shake up your spiritual life. I challenge you to allow yourself to be attentive to God’s voice in the silence and be filled and nurtured by it. Because silence is not empty—it is filled with God’s presence and invites us to encounter Him.

I recently read the FemCatholic article, “Why Women Sometimes Hate Men.” It took time for me to respond because it's a difficult piece for me to read. It's difficult because I, too, have thought about and experienced all that the author describes. She questions where women can find hope in what feels like a hopeless moment, and I get that. When you endure so much of the bad, even unto finding it in your own home, it's easy to lose sight of any selflessness that might exist in the vast group called "men." The author concludes her reflection by encouraging us to appeal to Mary as a gradual way back to faith in men and faith in the Church through yet another round of soul-wrenching sexual scandals that predominantly incriminate men.

When I finished reading her piece, I asked myself which married men of the Bible gave me hope.

Jesus shows us strength and love, but He's the Son of God and the bridegroom of the Church. Of course Jesus shows perfect strength and love because He’s full man and full God. What about the rest of us? Are there any other examples in the Bible of a simple, holy husband who willingly sacrificed much for his wife and children?

The Old Testament gives us many examples of husbands that are neutral (at best) or demonstrate what not to do. Adam, you probably shouldn't throw your wife under the bus before Almighty God. Abraham, you probably shouldn't be so willing to pass your wife off as your sister and share her with whatever ruler wants another wife. Jacob, maybe you shouldn't play favorites. David? Let's not get into it.

The New Testament is different. Within the first couple of chapters of the Gospels, we witness an often named, often overlooked, and amazing husband. It's easy to forget about him because he doesn't draw attention to himself. He is the epitome of St. Paul's imperative in Philippians 2:3 to "humbly regard others as more important than yourselves."

You guessed it - I’m talking about St. Joseph.

God chose St. Joseph to sacrifice and care for Mary as she carried the Messiah in her womb. God chose St. Joseph to be Jesus’ foster father as He grew into adulthood. St. Joseph isn't recorded as saying a single word, but his actions speak volumes about what it means to be the husband who, like Christ, "handed himself over for her."

St. Joseph isn't recorded as saying a single word, but his actions speak volumes about what it means to be the husband who, like Christ, "handed himself over for her."

In taking Mary as his wife, Joseph sacrificed whatever social status was in place for a man who married a virgin. He chose to believe the voice of the angel, that the child she conceived was the Son of God. This was an incredible sacrifice in a time when Levitical law required unwed pregnant women to be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21) or at the very least, as Joseph thought before his dream, to be "put away."

Through bringing Mary and Jesus into Egypt, Joseph gave up whatever clientele as a carpenter he had in Nazareth and Bethlehem.

When he took Mary as his wife, Joseph gave up any sexual rights that accompanied a marriage contract.

In every aspect of Joseph’s life and character, I see someone who selflessly gave up traditional forms of power, protected the most vulnerable, and poured himself out for his wife and Son in the ways that they needed him to in that moment. And he did it all without complaining or trying to manipulate his sacrifices into a position of power.

In [Joseph], I see someone who selflessly gave up traditional forms of power, protected the most vulnerable, and poured himself out for his wife and Son

I know that there are other men like Joseph (or at least those striving to be like him) out there today. You don't hear much about them because, like Joseph, they quietly serve, quietly sacrifice, and quietly regard others as more important than themselves. Although we may not hear about them, they are still there. And maybe you even know of one.

♦♦♦

My own husband gradually became like a St. Joseph.

It took time and we went through dark days. In the thick of it, after what felt like the deepest betrayal, I thought I would never be able to love or be loved the way that I had hoped. My husband, like the author's husband, told me "it was no big deal" after the first revelations. The discovery felt like taking a baseball bat to my heart. The ignorant downplay of it as "no big deal" was akin to setting my heart on fire - a raging fire.

"Fine," I thought, "then he won't mind a little lesson."

I set everything up minutes before my husband came home from work. I had our daughter in her booster seat at the dinner table, turned directly away from an open laptop screen that I set up in the corner of the adjoining room. You could see the laptop easily if you walked through the front door of our tiny apartment, but not if you were sitting at the table. I had a short video on loop with the sound off. My husband walked in, immediately saw the laptop, and became angry. "What's the big deal?" I asked him. "Our daughter didn't see it. If it shouldn’t be a big deal to me, you should be comfortable with having all of us in the same room. You're okay having this in our house sometimes, right?" He admitted that it was a big deal and that he didn't like having it in our house at any time.

I wish I could say it was all uphill from there, but it took two to three years to bring into the light all of the sexual lies my husband believed about himself, about me, and about the world around us. It took that long because getting to the truth was like emptying an old, dark, musty closet that my husband only ever opened to shove more lies into; nothing ever came out of that closet. The stuff at the very back was even a shock to him.

After everything was out in the open and we began working towards reconciliation, I unsurprisingly developed a form of emotional PTSD, where bad thoughts of the past would attack my mind and heart as if it were happening again. The bad dreams were the worst.

At that time, we couldn’t find helpful Catholic books on the topic of reconciling with each other. We did, however, find a helpful book by psychologist Gary Gottman entitled What Makes Love Last? Back then, Dr. Gottman seemed to be the only one who took all forms of betrayal seriously and outlined practical steps on how to help a couple through them. One of his best (and hardest) tips was his encouragement to talk about the past for as long as the hurt partner needed to discuss it.

One of [Dr. Gary Gottman's] best (and hardest) tips was his encouragement to talk about the past for as long as the hurt partner needed to discuss it.

I didn't want to do this. I hated that I would have flashbacks or get flooded with tears and anger. I didn't want to talk about it anymore. I wanted it to be behind us. Wasn't talking about it again brooding over injury, as 1 Corinthians 13 says not to do? I fought this advice at first. The frustrating thing was that when I tried to be strong enough not to share, it would snowball into other bad things: wanting to drink too much to dull the thoughts, becoming even more angry at my husband for putting me in this situation to begin with (that was actual brooding), or getting unjustifiably angry with the kids over little things because I was trying to love them from an empty heart. I knew that my husband was no longer doing those things that hurt me so deeply. I knew he had grounded himself in Truth and had taken practical, prudent steps to avoid compromising situations. I didn't see or notice any suspicious actions that suggested otherwise. Why did I need to keep reliving the past?

The reality was that I wasn't harping on the past, I was sharing myself in a vulnerable present. In telling my husband about these attacks from thoughts or dreams, I was giving him the opportunity to love me how I needed to be loved in that moment. This is when I started to really believe that my husband loved me: when he was willing to hear about a past that involved him in a negative way over and over and over again, all for the sake of my healing. He answered my paranoid questions and held me when I cried (again). Gradually, the attacks became less frequent and less powerful.

This is when I started to really believe that my husband loved me: when he was willing to hear about a past that involved him in a negative way. . ., all for the sake of my healing.

Nine years later, I can't believe where we are today. My husband amazed me at his growing perseverance to pursue the long process of healing and to build a strong foundation for our marriage that honestly had never been there before. He healed and I healed. This doesn't mean that life is perfect for us. We still have all of the challenges of marriage, children, and life stuff to figure out; but now I feel like I have a real partner in that. Today, I know that my husband strives to be like St. Joseph.

If I could speak to the author of the article I mentioned, I would tell her to take heart. Do not give up. If you keep fighting the despair, if you keep fighting the terrifying feeling that all men are a little bit awful, if you keep grounding yourself, you will go through what feels like a death, but there will also be a resurrection. You will come out on the other side as what my husband likes to call an "established woman." Someone who knows the darkness, but who also knows that the light is stronger.

To the author: I will be praying for you, whoever you are, and asking St. Joseph to pray for your husband every day.

This author would like to remain anonymous.