THEOLOGY OF THE BODY

THEOLOGY OF THE BODY STUDY GROUP NOTES
FR. THOMAS LOYA
November 12, 2008

"Man and Woman He Created Them" by JP2G
newly re-translated and expanded text

[superfluous and useless comments in brackets by Sr. Helena]

Starting p. 264

More important than the presidential election was the passing of California's Proposition 8 (same-sex "marriage"). Mormons [ironically, historically in favor of polygamy!] are being persecuted now because of it (they poured $ into defeating the bill). If CA had passed it, the whole country probably would have. The Mormons and Evangelicals were fasting for this. The Evangelicals were speaking of a "sacramental view of marriage." [According to Rick Santorum, quoting an article in Atlantic Monthly, there is a billionaire gay activist, Tim Gill, who is pouring his millions into various state battles over same-sex marriage, managing to oust politicians and replace them with pro-same-sex politicians, etc. He has been "70% successful."]

Try asking a political candidate: "What is your view of the human person?" This is the most important question we can ever ask.

"Ethos"—the difference between "commandment" and "ethos" is very great. "Ethos" is your internal, moral position. We're supposed to live the laws out of our ethos. The goal is not to need laws at all.

JP2G knows we need the big vision behind Humanae Vitae or we wouldn't accept it. There are only two reasons why people don't accept Church teaching: hardness of heart or not understanding the big vision. Once we accept the big vision, we automatically accept the specifics. It took JP2G to fill in the total vision that Paul VI gave us. Once you have the "why," you have the "how to."

The world has a different view of the human person that will never converge with the Church's view—it's like two parallel railroad tracks. The world can't understand why the Church can't change. That's why they beat on the Church constantly.

Jesus takes us back further than the Old Testament. The people of his time kept quoting the Scriptures to him, but He said that wasn't God's original plan. We can't totally regain our lost innocence, but we can get back. But Jesus didn't stop there—he wanted to bring us into the future and show us the ultimate of God's plan for us.

Jesus said: "If a man looks lustfully at a woman, he commits adultery." And then JP2G said even if a HUSBAND looks at his WIFE lustfully, he commits adultery. Father thought all the feminists would rejoice at this, but they didn't understand because we are all so confused about what lust is. People thought—oh, great, now we can't even desire our spouses!
[Lust is always wrong, it's looking at/treating a person as thing for our own self-gratification. Desire is to want someone in their totality as a person. Desire can be disordered. We can desire someone we can't "have, but at least we are desiring them in their totality as persons. Desire within marriage is "go for it"! (Because we're relating to the other as a person, not as a thing, and all the mutuality that goes with that.) Lust within marriage is never permissible, which is what JP2G is saying.]

p. 267-269: The term "adultery" is used (even thought it applies to single men and single women) because of the spousal meaning of the body!!!!!! Every BODY has a spousal meaning. In a sense, any sexual sin IS adultery. ["The body is for the Lord."]

"The spousal mystery is the fundamental element of human existence." –JP2G

Abraham and Sarah didn't really understand God's intention and so they gave "an interpretation that had superimposed" (p. 268) itself on the original vision of good and evil (Sarah gave Abraham her slave girl in order to raise up an heir).

Just because something's in the Bible doesn't mean God approves of it! Some of it is just a narrative of what happened!

There were all kinds of interpretations and twisting of the Law—so people could justify themselves and say "I haven't done anything wrong according to the Law," and yet our consciences (p. 270) know better, actually DO know what the Law really means.

Contrary to popular belief, studies are showing that men are genetically hardwired for monogamy. [So are women.]

Q: So why is it so hard for us to do the right thing?
A: The Fall. The "man of concupiscence." We want absolute autonomy without answering to an authority. We want to be our own god, decide what is right and wrong.

p. 272: Altho' some OT laws about sexuality seems severe, it's in order to protect the order of the social life—marriage and family.

Aside from the Law, what IS this relationship of man and woman? (p. 276)

We treat people as we believe God is. Our TWO basic images of God: TRINITY (communion of Persons), INCARNATION (God becomes one of us, one of our stuff). BOTH images are God going out of Himself to unite Himself with the other.

In Eastern Church, Christmas is called: "The Incarnation" or "The Divine Condescension."

THE ONLY STORY THERE IS: An invisible God has become visible through the physical. ALL CHRISTIAN HERESIES GO ASTRAY FROM THIS IN SOME WAY. Jesus was completely God and completely human.

JPII was not original—that's a compliment. He took the riches of the Catholic Church and organized it in a new way. [Properly.]

The language of the liturgy is conjugal. To be Catholic is to be fully human. It's the fullest truth about the human person. The human being is the apex of Creation. When spouses come together conjugally, they become "virginal," meaning they are singular, one. [John Lennon intuited this: he felt "virginal" with Yoko, thus his album "Two Virgins."]

Q: So in heaven, we're all celibate because there's no marriage?
A: Marriage in heaven is not like it is on earth. Marriage is union. Heaven is union. Heaven is the one marriage of the Lamb and we are the Bride. In Latin-rite Church we say: "till death do us part." In Eastern Church: "till death bring you together forever." It means the same thing.

Comment by participant: So, when a husband looks lustfully at his wife, he violates her virginity, or rather HIS virginity WITH her. [Wow.]

The "H" Zone:

If we're HONEST, we'll be HOLY, it'll lead to HAPPINESS and HEAVEN.
If we DISS HONESTY or are DISHONEST, we'll HURT (and God and the Church don't want you to hurt), and wind up in H-E-double hockeysticks. (So Father tells the teens who ask "how far" they can go in dating—if it's totally honest, go ahead and do it.)

If you give yourself wholly to one person, you're done! You only have ONE body to give to one person! That's why polygamy, promiscuity, etc., is such a lie. Look at the tension between Sarah and Hagaar!

December 13—Fr. Loya doing day of recollection for men on lust, desire, how to see/look at women, etc. "Anatomy of a Woman." http://www.taborlife.org/

p. 280—The Bible seems to pick on men particularly when it comes to warning about lust. Woman instead, is frequently pictured as the seductress, but not only—the virtuous woman is also praised. [Different warnings because we're different!]

Q: How can we look at persons in a way that doesn't just look at externals?

A: Practice looking at nature and other things in their entirety, in their integrity, etc. When you look at women, even in billboards, "personalize it." Make up a story about this woman, make her a real person. SEE, PRAY & PASS ON. Praise God for such beauty and move on. Spirituality of wonderment. "Unless you become like little children." Beauty should make you pray rather than lust. That will become your ETHOS.

In Europe, they're better at portraying the human body in all its beauty without making it provocative. Why Europe? Catholic country, Catholic ethos.

The way they teach people in D.C. to recognize counterfeit money: they NEVER show them the fake stuff, so that as soon as they see it/feel it, they know it!

For past 500 yrs: [Cartesian] Mind/Body split: body is not of value any more, so we just use it, pollute it, destroy it, etc. It became all about the rational. JP2G put Mind/Body back together and said: here's the proper worldview.

MOVIES: "THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PAJAMAS"

YYYYY

There can never be too many Holocaust movies. It's true there are many different "holocausts": the Armenians, Rwanda, the Ukrainians, the pre-born, etc., but the Jewish Holocaust is quintessential, at least for modern times. The Nazis employed and developed the latest technologies to make human extermination/extinction a science. The great modern project of paradise-on-earth-via-science-and-technological-progress was twisted almost beyond repair, and instead, created hell on earth. Postmodernism is born.

"The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" (from the 2006 children's novel) is a fresh, unblinking, exacting gaze at the horror that happened not so long ago. The movie poster says it all (please ignore the lame tagline on the poster)--there is "us" and "them," or rather "us" and "not-them." Two little eight-year-old boys on either side of a barbed wire fence, Bruno (German) and Schmuel (Jewish), try to make sense of something that doesn't make sense at all.

Bruno's (Asa Butterfield of the biggest, bluest peepers ever) Dad (David Thewlis) is a Nazi officer who moves the family a little too close to a concentration camp. Bruno, who loves adventure books and aspires to be an explorer, disobeys and has--very believable--clandestine meetings with Schmuel (Jack Scanlon). Once you get over the British accents and British-isms coming out of the mouths of Germans and European Jews (just embrace the exquisite British acting!), "Pajamas" is a "perfect film." I repeat, "Pajamas" is a perfect film. It's rated PG-13, but younger children should definitely see it also. (The Brothers Grimm pulled no punches either.) Life hurts, life is harsh. Evil is real. What side do YOU want to be on? This is probably THE best Holocaust movie for children because the story is simple, linear, and follows a child's process of reasoning.

If we are becoming a post-literate society, film can be a great way to peer into history, and examine our values. Although no Holocaust movie seems to capture the terror, the utterly debased living conditions, the outsized cruelty, this film gets to the living heart of the matter: What was going on in Nazi Germany and why, in all its nationalistic, ideological, "we're making the world a better place," murderous fervor. (See Ben Stein's movie "Expelled" for the Darwin-Hitler "natural selection" connection.)

"Pajamas" is also the story of a little boy who wants to be proud of his father, but can't. (What DID the Nazis tell their children when the propaganda didn't work?)

The score by the incomparable James Horner is imperceivable and scant. Silence and words are the eloquence here. Note the silence after Bruno asks Schmuel what he did wrong and Schmuel answers: "I'm a Jew." The same uber-civilized piece of classical music wafts through happy and gut-wrenching scenes alike.

The ending? Better the young people who go see this film realize what really happens when you start calling certain categories of persons "non-persons." Life is not a videogame.

MOVIES: "SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE"

YY 1/2

"Slumdog" is an improbable--nay--fantastical story of Jamal, a little boy living in the slums of India, who grows up to work in an Indian "call center" (you know: those outsourced customer service destinations--ha ha! we have NOT seen that before in a movie), and winds up on India's "Who Wants To Be a Millionaire." And wins the jackpot. (The host is no Regis Philbin. He be nasty.)

It sounds like I'm giving away the ending, but that's actually the beginning. Through a series of flashbacks, we relive Jamal and his brother Salim's tragic young life--although they have many fun scrapes and chases with police, and clever entrepreneurial forays in order to survive. Along the way, they pick up their "third musketeer," a girl, Latika, who becomes Jamal's true love. "Slumdog" is really a love story in true Indian fashion: one love forever, and it's all the more delightful that they find each other while they are just kids (a set of three different actors play the children, teens and young adults--the best actors being the children, teens and adults, in that order).

The film promises a great escapade as we follow the children, but bogs down once Jamal reaches adulthood. We are forced to suspend our disbelief many, many times from this point on, which we wouldn't mind if the story was bloody good. Every ensuing plot point and event happens predictably and with impossibly perfect timing.

Although there are some rough torture and violence scenes in the beginning of the film (including rough treatment of children), the spirit of the film is one of "dogged" determination and triumph over obstacles, with a sense of destiny and a higher purpose running things. It actually changes in tone from an earnest look at the lives of the poor (earnest but hopeful, through children's eyes), to a slick coming-of-age gangster-type caper.

Hats off to director Danny Boyle who made a thoroughly Indian-feeling film (albeit very modern, with a Mumbai-meets-Harlem hip-hop vibe). Methinks Boyle likes trains (he directed "Trainspotting" and "Millions" which also have trains figuring prominently. And whether he knows it or not, Boyle's masterpiece is "Millions.") He uses trains as pounding, pulsing characters, driving the energy and action forward.

DO notice how India is looking more and more like the USA. DON'T expect too much from the film and you just might find it enjoyable.

HAPPY ALL SAINTS AND ALL SOULS!

Chris is 5.

MOVIES: "MILLIONS"

The DVD "Millions" (from the 2004 British movie) is perfect for All Saints Day and All Souls Day. "Millions" is a "Miracle of Marcellino" for the twenty-first century.

Damian (Alex Etel), a little boy who reads about and talks to saints--when they appear to him he recognizes them and rattles off their birth and death dates--comes into the possession of a sustantial bag of money. Little does he know it's stolen. His older brother, Anthony (Lewis McGibbon)--a budding young wheeler and dealer--finds out about Damian's stash, and wants to invest it in real estate. However, Damian wants to give it to the poor. Although they disagree about how the money is to be spent, they agree on one thing: not to tell anyone, especially not their widowed Dad (James Nesbitt). But it's not long before the robbers come looking for their money and things turn dangerous.

"Millions" is an exploration of both taking the Gospel at face value, and the childlike faith that is needed to enter the kingdom of heaven. When Damian and Anthony's Dad finally finds out about the money, he is as tempted as anyone to use the money for himself. All the adults have their rationalizations, but not Damian, who angrily stands up to them. The tagline for the film is: "Can anyone be truly good?" Damian wants to be good so he can go to heaven and see his deceased Mum (All Souls), but we also gather that he understands the essence of the Gospel and wants to be good "for goodness' sake."

<

Heavenly appearances (All Saints)--which are portrayed in both an utterly organic and utterly magical way--include: St. Francis, St. Nicholas, St. Clare, the Ugandan Martyrs, St. Joseph and St. Peter. This film is perhaps one of the most charming ever made (marred only by Damian catching his father in bed with a government lady who came to talk at his school). The filming is lush, glorious and a truly artful. Kids--who probably think along the same lines as Damian--won't enjoy "Millions" as much as teens and adults in our various stages of jadedness. A great question to ask ourselves is simply: What would I do with a million dollars (that wasn't really mine)?

THEATER: "SCREWTAPE LETTERS"

I love living in Chicago--it's a great theater town! And last night, three other sisters and myself had a front row seat in hell. Literally. "Screwtape Letters"--the C. S. Lewis book about a senior devil coaching a junior devil how to tempt humans--is now playing at the Mercury Theater: 773-325-1700.

Our tickets said "obstructed view." Hmmmm. What was our view obstructed by? The stage itself. Sitting down, we were eye-level with the edge of the stage, and our knees were pressed up against it. We are not making this up. The theater was ice-cold. I mean icy. Why? Because we were right next to a large air vent from the great outdoors (some fire code, no doubt). Max McLean (Uncle Screwtape) has some mighty acting chops, and some mighty saliva glands. It was like being under a steady rainforest mist. When the fog machine started blowing RIGHT IN OUR FACES, we couldn't stop laughing. It was like St. Alphonsus di Liguori's "Preparation for Death." It was truly an experience of hell and an opportunity to "offer it up." Sr. Anne kept talking about hot cocoa and echinacea all the way home on the CTA.

Atmospherics notwithstanding, "Screwtape" is magnificent. If you've read the book, it'll all come "flooding" back to you (in more ways than one). Max McLean*--with British accent--is outstanding, and his minion-secretary, Toadpipe (Yvonne Gougelet for our production), is one agile and ticklish demon. She takes dictation, bounds and contorts around the stage, and, most hilariously, acts out what we humans look like to the realms below. (One very cool thing about having our schnozzes eye-level with "the-demon-lady-all-in-gray" was that we could see her toenails which were painted a glossy gray to match her fingernails. Tres, tres cool.)

I could see "Screwtape" over and over again. It's like audiobooks gone visual. Much to chew on. A pert reminder of what's really important in time and eternity, and what's it's all for. (One man leaving the theater said: "Boy, am I convicted!") Just remember the following:

His Abysmal Sublimity Screwtape----------senior demon

Wormwood---------------------------------junior demon

Toadpipe-----------------------------------Screwtape's secretary

The Patient---------------------------------a young man

The Enemy----------------------------------God

our father below------------------------------Satan

Some highlights:

--The idea that death is the worst thing that could happen to us was invented by the devil ("our father below").

--Pleasure was invented by God, and hell--even with all its research--has not been able to produce even one true pleasure.

--Satan requires everything from us and gives us nothing in return.

--Middle age is a great time for the devil to wear you down.

--The devil loves to use vagueness to keep us subjugated.

--It's not so much sin or "big sins" that the devil uses. He'll use whatever will take us away from God.

--The devil is a "realist."

--To believe in the possibility/existence of love is a heresy in Hades.

--The devil--like he convinced Adam and Eve to be--is suspicious of God--there's no such thing as love, so what is He really up to?

If you live in Chi-town, or are planning to come here between now and January, go see something truly "Wicked": "Screwtape Letters."

________________________________

*Max McLean has done much Christian theater and recorded three versions of the Bible on CD. An ad for the Bible CDs in the playbill says: "Screwtape does NOT recommend these. Listen at your own risk."

SECOND MIRACLE FOR MEDIA APOSTLE BLESSED JAMES ALBERIONE?

Miracle of intercessory prayer

Posted to Pauline Charism Live on October 27, 2008

Click to Play View Details

OK--here's this little cutie-patootie's story, third hand, but I'm sure the gist is correct. Little Owen was having seizures IN THE WOMB, and was so bad off when he was born that the hospital sent him home, with hospice, to die. The doctor overseeing his condition was interviewed by some MEDIA OUTLET about dying babies. Since Owen was such a hopeless case, the doctor decided to take the media people to his house to see a "dying baby." Owen's family had been praying to Blessed James Alberione for a miracle. As soon as the doctor saw little Owen that day, he realized THIS BABY IS NOT DYING. Needless to say, THE MEDIA GOT TO COVER A MIRACLE INSTEAD.

MOVIES: "HAPPY-GO-LUCKY"

This is a maddening little film. Just like the main character, Poppy (Sally Hawkins). I KNOW people like Poppy. I think everyone does. Sometimes I even adopt a Poppy-like attitude (for small increments of time). But why should I be maddened by someone who has chosen to enjoy life, savor life, be chipper all the time AND try to spread that attitude toward others? Isn't that perverse of me?

Poppy's seemingly superficial breezing through life isn't exactly that. She's a fantastic elementary school teacher, tries to help a troubled student and a homeless man. So what makes her annoying? When people don't respond to her cheeriness, she turns it up. The more uptight they are, the more footloose and fancy-free she becomes. Especially in the case of her driving instructor, Scott (the BAFTA-worthy Eddie Marsan). Scott is so livid at one point that he is spitting in his beard as he fumes. One could say that Scott got himself all worked up. But Poppy is the catalyst. She seems to enjoy pushing people to their limits in a detached way (can't you see he's getting upset?) That's what makes her annoying, and that's what makes this film very philosophical.

Poppy's philosophy IS "happy-go-lucky," and although no tragedy touches her in the movie beyond a stolen bike and a leaking bathroom, she faces everything with the same super-positivity. It's not that she doesn't care, it's that she's made the choice to smile and laugh and dance in the midst of everything. Her philosophy is put to the test only in little ways (the biggest being Scott's stalking her and eventually blowing up at her). But she is dead serious about being the ebullient person she has chosen to be (and probably is naturally). It seems that she truly wishes others were as free as she was, and by doggedly being herself tries to give them permission to join her perpetual happy hour.

This slice-of-life movie stuck with me as I wrestled with her neat little philosophy of life and tried to find loopholes. (So I guess it's a better movie than I originally thought it was.) However, Poppy does not have a character arc. There's no journey. Her encounter with Scott leaves them both the same. If she has a journey, it's either in the past or the future.

What's "wrong" with being happy ALL the time, having a one-note emotional palette? Couldn't it even be considered heroic? ("The Myth of Sisyphus" kept coming to mind.) Perhaps, but it just doesn't seem very human.

MOVIES: "RELIGULOUS"

Part rant, part search, part public discourse (much needed), part documentary, part propaganda, part comedy routine, Bill Maher's "Religulous" (soft "g") is nothing new. No new questions, no new answers. 

It's rated "R," but aside from several seconds of a woman's breasts and crude language, it could be PG-13. I'm glad it's not, because young people--with no background, context or guidance--might get confused by Maher's self-proclaimed doubt mongering, at a time in their lives when they're doing very well in the doubt department.

Kudos to Maher for starting off with full disclosure of his own religious upbringing and views. His mother was Jewish, his father was Catholic (presumably Irish), and he was raised Catholic until he decided it was all bunk when he was a teenager. His father also stopped going to church around then because, as his mother candidly says, "We were using contraception, and the Church doesn't allow that." (When's the last time you heard that kind of plain and simple honesty?) 

Maher's premise is threefold: a) We can't know anything about God with certainty, so our stance should be doubt. b) Religion is a destructive and harmful force that belongs to an unenlightened age. Since God isn't talking to us, others are filling in for Him with their evil and pernicious agendas. c) Religion is a neurological disorder. 

What keeps "Religulous" fresh is Maher's approach. He's a comedian by trade, and a bright one, like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. He asks questions that he really wants to know the answer to, and is willing to be surprised, speechless and look foolish (and cause the same in his interviewees). He is extremely inconsistent in his own purported lack of belief, notwithstanding his final "religion-will-bring-about-the-death-of-us-all" tirade at the end. He asks Christian truckers to pray over him. He relates a story of some bargain he made with God when he was forty and wanted to quit smoking. He's obsessed, really, with religion, and I'm sure now has an army of believers praying for him to see the light. If you stay for the credits, you'll hear him (consistently inconsistent) say to his mom--who passed away in 2007, but is in the film--"See you in heaven." 

Being the moviemaker, Maher has the upper hand in correcting (via witty subtitles) misspeakers, while his own inaccuracies go unchallenged. (I'm sure a subtitled rebuttal will follow on YouTube.) There's much misinformation tumbling forth from Maher's mouth, but it doesn't feel blasphemous because Maher just cares so much about this stuff. He seeks almost LIKE a teenager, and it's astounding that he hasn't resolved certain basic universal human quandaries yet. The religionists he interrogates don't quite clinch the deal, and take him only halfway. (But I'm betting the editing killed many good answers and comebacks. The brilliant scientist/Christian apologist Francis Collins was only on for a suspiciously short time, and he has some incredibly compelling arguments for belief.) 

Maher's anger flairs mostly at fellow Jews, and at the Jesus-actor from a Bible theme park who seemed to touch a nerve when he says that sex and drugs and other escapes may be used to fill the God-shaped hole in each one of us, but it's never going to make us complete and happy. Maher also ponders what "Jesus" said to him about water having three properties: steam, liquid and ice as an explanation of the Trinity. This seemed to make a great deal of sense to Maher. 

Maher is comfortable talking to anyone: ultra-orthodox Jews, former Mormons, televangelists, evolution-deniers, radical Muslim jihadist rappers, and an extremely grumpy Vatican priest. 

In general, the Catholic Church comes off looking fairly OK, especially when, exasperated with fundamentalists, Maher turns to astronomer Fr. George Coyne, SJ, of the Vatican Observatory (not the grump), who tells him in no uncertain terms that the Bible is not a science textbook. Coyne calls fundamentalism a "plague," and reiterates John Paul II's famous statement that "neo-Darwinist evolution is now more than just a hypothesis." 

So, when Maher later insists on interpreting the Bible literally, citing "talking snakes" and the Jonah story, we KNOW that he knows better. This is intellectual dishonesty and a real smoke screen behind which he hides. And he's just stumped by the Virgin Birth (as are many theologians), returning to it over and over. He puts it on a par with Scientology's creed. 

There's much to agree with in "Religulous." Bad religion is bad religion. Bad actions of religious people are bad. But what about the good religion has done? No mention. (Whatever good religion has produced, Maher believes is available without God.) The most guileless folks that seemed to touch Maher's heart were the black and white Southern Christian truckers, crammed in their tiny trailer chapel, and the "ex-gay" dude, every bit as worldly-wise as Maher. 

Unlike Richard Dawkins (who is an atheist, while Maher is an agnostic), Maher frequently sticks up for Jesus, dissociating Him from his followers, something Jesus never did. ("Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting ME?") Like Dawkins, however, Maher pompously blunders about the religious world without the most basic theological concepts. And if, in his travels, he was apprised of any, those interviews were cut out completely. (E.g., Maher judges the writers of the Gospel by 21st century news-reporting standards.) 

Maher thinks religion is for "comfort," and that that comfort comes at the price of religions annihilating each other and the world in some great, inevitable, "will of God" doomsday delusion. He's half right. There are far too many scary Christians who believe it is OUR duty to provoke a violent apocalypse so that Jesus will come back.

In a media world of cynicism and spin, at least the jesters are taking religion seriously, even while trying to discredit it.

MOVIES: "I'VE LOVED YOU SO LONG"

This French film is well-constructed and beautifully acted, but, alas, is a "message film." What is the message? (Spoiler alert!--but you will probably guess the ending in the first twenty minutes, as I did.) Juliette (the ageless Kristin Scott Thomas who speaks French through the whole movie!) just got out of prison after serving fifteen years for killing her six-year-old son. Yup: "Mercy-killing." He had a painful terminal illness.

She goes to stay with her sister, Lea (Elsa Zylberstein), who--huge logic gap--didn't know her nephew was terminally ill (even though he would scream in pain and could barely move until he was fatally injected by his doctor-mom). Once Lea finds out that it was a mercy-killling, all tension and dark clouds vanish. (Why DID she think her sister did it?) What Juliette did was OK.

I was really enjoying this film (hoping my guess was wrong), but I thought it strange that this French movie was filled with children everywhere (I mean, this is France, right?) Well, the nation doth protest too much. When we are cut off from the Source of Life, the ONLY choice left is death. A culture of death. That parades as a culture of life.

"I've Loved You So Long" joins the growing catalogue of euthanasia films (and I shan't be surprised if it wins an award): "Million Dollar Baby," "The Sea Inside," etc.

GOOD NEWS IN THE FACE OF PORNOGRAPHY--PART 2

Porn is one of the most difficult addictions to overcome because not only is the body addicted to its own chemicals/hormones, but at times, no outside stimulus is needed, one has only to recall the pornographic images already stored in one's brain.

IT'S NOT FAIR.

Another reason porn is one of the most difficult addictions is the incredible, diabolical ease with which one gets started. You don't have to buy anything. It's not illegal. You don't have to be of age. You don't have to leave the house. It's portable if you do leave the house. It's available 24/7. And if you use a computer at all, you're going to see porn whether you want to or not. You WILL be solicited. And if you do SEEK porn in a moment of weakness, all you have to do is type four letters and hit enter. Done.

IT'S NOT FAIR.

With alcohol, you may or may not be an alcoholic. You'll find out if you start drinking. With porn, everyone is a pornaholic because everyone has a body, everyone is a sexual being. All it takes is ONE LOOK. One of the most basic human actions. Looking. Vision. Seeing. Since men are aroused visually, porn is much more addictive for them. However, WOMEN, too, are increasingly becoming addicted to porn, and this also needs to come out in the open, lest women think that THEIR porn addiction is worse, more "unforgiveable," less feminine somehow.

IT'S NOT FAIR.

Porn taps into the deepest, most fundamental longing of the human person: to be loved, body and soul. To be affirmed as man or woman, body and soul.

IT'S NOT FAIR.

Porn ruins the best gift God gave us: each other. The gift of woman to man and man to woman. Or, as JP2G says: woman FOR man and man FOR woman. What could be more diabolical? "Diabolical" means literally to "split," "divide."

IT'S NOT FAIR.

Porn addiction is a "new" way (because of its newfound availability and prevalence) for men to abandon their families.

IT'S NOT FAIR.

WHAT DO YOU DO IN SPORTS WHEN AN ATHLETE DOESN'T PLAY FAIR? YOU ELMINATE THEM. YOU DISQUALIFY THEM. IF YOU KNEW FROM THE START THIS PERSON WASN'T GOING TO PLAY FAIR, YOU'D NEVER EVEN LET THEM ON THE TEAM.
SO, WITH PORN (WHICH DOESN'T PLAY FAIR)--DON'T TAKE THE FIRST DRINK. JUST DON'T.

But how can we prevent that first, unsolicited drink that gets poured down our throats against our will when we're 10 years old?

It's not going to be easy.

Should we head for the hills and unplug and opt out of the media culture that we're all swimming in and depending on in so many ways? That's a decision that everyone has to make for themselves and their families. And is it even possible?

Fr. Benedict Groeschel, CFR, a psychologist has this profound (paraphrased) insight: Even though we may claim we believe in free will, we have been so brainwashed by popular psychology--Freudian and other deterministic schools of thought--that we don't really believe in the possibility of humans to change, and we hamstring ourselves from the get-go. Our willpower has been seriously undermined by ourselves. (I'm not saying that addicts can be healed by applying sheer willpower, but that addictions can be averted and thwarted, in part, by willpower, starting with the RECOGNITION of our willpower.)

If you opt to stay in the media culture and use computers, cable/dish TV, cell phones, etc., (all porn gateways) here are some action items. If they don't work, we need to rework them, because we'll lose the farm. We'll lose everything, as porn addicts are able to tell us firsthand.

--Pray. Live a sacramental life.
--Communicate your values about sexuality in an open, positive way with your children of all ages. Constantly.
--Be honest with your spouse about any and all sexual failings as they happen.
--Get help immediately for porn problems.
--Instruct yourself, your family and others in Theology of the Body.
--Instruct yourself, your familiy in Media Literacy and Media Mindfulness.
--Communicate about media with your children. Constantly.
--Get a serious porn blocker for your computer / TV.
--Have TVs and computers in public areas of your home. Have designated times for use.
--Train your children to use their willpower.
--Talk to your children about porn.
--Have your children report to you any porn that makes its way into your home.
--Consecrate yourselves to the Blessed Virgin Mary.
--Communicate constantly with your children about the true love that God wants for them and how to attain it.

Unfortunately, porn is a part of all of our lives now. (It's SO not fair.) Deal with it.

GOOD NEWS IN THE FACE OF PORNOGRAPHY

Pornography use is progressive, addictive, toxic and fatal (if not dealt with). Is there any hope? Plenty. But before listing resources, it's important to simply talk about what pornography IS--because that conversation just isn't happening in the Church (in any big way) beyond official Church documents and: "It's bad, stay away." And that's tragic, because bringing porn into the light is the ONLY thing that breaks its hold.

Actually, SEX hasn't been talked about in the Church (in any open way) beyond a kind of listing of "thou shalt nots." The devil is laughing up his sleeve at all this because while the porn industry is going mainstream, Christians are clinging to a puritanical and dangerous silence with regard to sex. Therefore, who gets to tell the young and not so young their story about the meaning of sex? Whoever isn't too shy to talk about it: Internet porn, Howard Stern, Playboy, "Sex and the City," "Gossip Girls," the Spice Channel, etc.

Enter John Paul II's "Theology of the Body." John Paul II talked about sex. A lot. About its beauty and goodness and desirability and centrality to our lives. He talked about how God invented sex, not as a forbidden fruit, but as an expression of our Godlike ability to give and receive love the way God loves: freely ("I do"), faithfully ("only you forever"), fully (total gift of self: body and soul), fruitfully (open to new life).

"Man cannot live without love. He remains a being that is incomprehensible for himself, his life is senseless if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it."

–John Paul II the Great

Since most porn users are men, we'll speak about it from the male side. Those lovely ladies don't really love you. They're being paid to act like they love you. (Drug use, STDs and suicide are high among porn stars because they are living a lie.) What about those porn stars who build their own empires and seem to suffer no consequences? Also a lie. They are living a radical body-soul split that will take its toll.

How do you know if you're addicted to porn? If you use it at all, you're addicted, because porn is addictive by nature. Porn is a multi-billion dollar business off of people's addictions.

Pornography is having sex with a fantasy. The porn user becomes addicted to their body's own chemicals. They become capable of being aroused ONLY by fantasy-images, and not their real-life, flesh-and-blood spouse. Therefore, porn emasculates.

Men lose interest in the real women around them, family, work, sports, hobbies, etc. The addiction becomes all-consuming. The addiction is also costly as bigger and more extreme thrills are needed. Porn addicts fear telling anyone because they fear losing everything: wife (whom they've rejected through porn), respect of family, friends, co-workers, church family. So, as angry as the revelation of a porn addiction may make us, if we make it too difficult for the addict to come clean, or too difficult when they do, everybody loses. God is bigger than addiction. God forgives those turning from addiction. God heals addiction.

Men who fight porn addiction in their lives are true heroes. They give the lie to a culture that says porn is normal and manly and harmless. As despicable as porn is, men willing to fight the battle against porn addiction need support and encouragement, like any other recovering addicts. Women need to applaud these men, who are strong in their weakness. "In weakness, power reaches perfection." Remember, these are the good guys, not the bad guys. These are the guys that don't want porn anymore and have risked everything to take a stand AGAINST porn (just as they risked everything FOR porn). These are men of incredible courage and character who are fulfilling their true vocation of upholding the dignity of women (and their own).

Shame and secrecy is the deadly combination that feeds the addiction. I once heard a priest say: "Why did Jesus call us 'children of the light'? Because we make our mistakes in the open." If we began openly acknowledging sex in a happy, healthy, reverent, non-graphic, non-trivializing, age-appropriate manner, the "naughty" factor that drives people to "forbidden pleasures" would be removed. Sex is the two-ton elephant in our Christian living rooms that nobody talks about because they don't seem to know what to say. The Theology of the Body is the answer.

DAUGHTERS OF ST. PAUL CHOIR

LET'S MAKE A MOVIE--RIGHT NOW!

Want your kids, grandkids, or religion class to feel empowered when it comes to media and making good media choices? There's no better way to understand how media is constructed than to make media ourselves. "Creating media" is one of four skills encouraged by the "media literacy" movement.

All you'll need is a video camera (or digital camera that takes a few minutes of video) and a computer (all Windows programs have "Windows Movie Maker" software). You can be as simple or elaborate as you want with everything else. Gather the kids and here's how to lead them.

1. "What's your big idea? What's your movie about? (Try a Bible story or parable--the story's already there!) Describe your movie in one sentence. Make your description exciting, fun, mysterious, or all three! What's the title of your movie? When you make the movie, who will do what? Remember, movie making is a team sport--no divas or divos! Respect each person and let them do their job. The writer tells the story by writing. The director tells the story by directing the actors and filming. The editor tells the story by editing. You can also have a producer (who makes sure everyone has what they need to get the job done). There's plenty of other jobs, too: casting director, actors, director's assistants, producer's assistants, wardrobe, hair, makeup, craft service (food!), location scout, prop master, agents, managers, lawyers, etc.

2. "Writer(s): The most important thing to know about writing a screenplay is: 'Show, don't tell.' Don't have too much talking. Use lots of action and tell the story through what people will see.

3. "When the story is written, have a "story meeting," and make sure everyone is OK with the story. The writer(s) job is now finished. Make copies of the script for everyone.

4. "Actors rehearse their parts by themselves, and then with the director. Actors can make suggestions about their parts, but the director has the final say.

5. "When all finished filming, have a 'wrap party,' and watch the raw footage!

6. "Now it's time to edit. The director can work with the editor. The editor gets rid of mistakes and everything that is unnecessary and makes sure the timing feels right. The editor can add narration, music and special effects. The editor can create the opening title frames and the credits at the end. In the credits, make sure to thank everyone who helped, even in little ways!

7. "Have a premiere (opening show). In Hollywood, everyone wears black to a premiere. Give yourselves a big hand!

8. "Have a meeting after the premiere. What did you learn from making this movie? What would you do differently? How could you have worked together better? Would you like to try another movie-making job?

9. "Start planning your next masterpiece!"

MEDIA AWARENESS TEST

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH & THE MEDIA

Do you know what the Catholic Church's position is on abortion? Helping the poor? You probably do. How about the Catholic Church's "official" position on the media? (By media we're referring to the whole enchilada: media content, technology and culture.) Not so sure? You're not alone. Contrary to popular belief, the Catholic Church has been trumpeting (at least in her documents since the mid-twentieth century) that the media are gifts of God. Any gift of God can be abused, but that doesn't make it any less a gift. More recently, the Church has declared that Catholics must be an "active, listening" presence in today's world which is created in part by the media. When you think about it, isn't that what the Church is called to be in the world in general? "Active"—we're "in the world, not of it," helping our fellow human beings, creating a "civilization of love." "Listening"—we care deeply about the struggles of our contemporaries, their sorrows and joys. We strive to listen to the heart of humanity.

 

So, what do we call this "official" position of the Church toward the media? "Media Literacy." The Church began wholeheartedly adopting the language of Media Literacy in the 1992 document: "Dawn of a New Era." Then, in 2003, just two months before he died, Pope John Paul the Great signed off on "Rapid Development," a small document on the "new media." New media refers to the recent explosion of new media technologies and applications: internet, wireless capabilities, digital technology, cell phones, social networking internet sites like Facebook, mp3 players, texting, computer games, instant messaging, etc. John Paul II repeats over and over in the document: Do not be afraid of the new technologies! Do not be afraid to use the new media! Put out into the deep! (And JP2G also gave us the example—he wasn't exactly a scaredy-cat when it came to media.) Not being afraid of media is a big part of Media Literacy. How can we be "literate" in something we're apprehensive of? (Both Vatican documents are available at www.vatican.va.)

 

The "National Directory for Catechesis" from the U.S. Bishops (what every catechist has under their pillow when they go to sleep at night) is full of Media Literacy. Here are some powerful Media Literacy quotes from the NDC:

 

"Especially in the U.S., 'the very evangelization of modern culture depends to a great extent on the influence of the media.' In fact, the mass media are so influential that they have a culture all their own, which has its own language, customs, and values."

 

"If the Gospel message is going to make sense to the next generation of Catholics…catechesis needs to find more sophisticated ways to employ these new technologies."

 

"Reality, for many, is what the media recognizes as real; what the media do not acknowledge seems of little importance."

 

"Communications media themselves are suitable subject matter for catechesis."

"The Church's mission requires her to be 'in the very midst of human progress, sharing the experiences of the rest of humanity, seeking to understand them and interpret them in the light of faith.'"

 

"Those to whom the Gospel message is addressed today, both young and old, are, in a sense, children of the media."

 

"The anonymity and lack of accountability in cyberspace requires a more sophisticated level of MEDIA LITERACY that has ever been needed in the past."

 

So, as you can see, the Church is asking something new of us.

 

What's the history of the Media Literacy movement? Although Media Literacy is not a religious movement, Catholics have been involved from the beginning because we care deeply about communications and culture. Canadian (and convert to Catholicism) Marshall McLuhan, a brilliant scholar and professor, wrote extensively about how media was profoundly changing the way we live and relate to one another. He was famous for his dictum: "The medium IS the message." Fr. Walter Ong, SJ, was also an early ML pioneer. Canada has been teaching ML in its schools at all grade levels for many years now, and the United States is catching on. Pittsburgh is the first diocese in the U.S. to mandate ML in its Catholic schools.

 

The best way to define ML might simply be: to question media. (A comprehensive definition can be found at www.medialit.org.) We don't want to be cynical with regard to media, but we want to understand as fully as we can what our fellow human beings are trying to communicate to us and why. In this stance of inquiry, our relationship to the media is such that WE are in charge. WE have the power. WE are asking the questions. Teach young people to ask questions of the media, and instantly, they, too, are in charge. ML does not avoid media, but engages in dialogue with media.

 

There are five basic approaches we can take to media in life: 1) stay away  2) look mostly for the bad  3) MEDIA LITERACY: think critically, participate actively  4) look mostly for the good  5) couch-PC-console potato. Which do you think is most helpful for navigating the media culture we're all living in?

 

Media Literacy also wants us to develop four media skills: 1) access media (use it!)  2) analyze media  3) evaluate media  4) act (anything from giving feedback to creating media ourselves). As an example of skill #4, check out Chicago seminarian, Andy Kirchoff's blog: www.catholicvideogamers.blogspot.com  Andy plays and critiques video games from a Catholic perspective.

 

The Five Core Concepts of Media Literacy are also turned into questions to make them easier to use. They can be used with any media.

1. All media are CONSTRUCTED. Even the most "objective"-looking media (like a news report or documentary film) have been constructed and filtered through someone. Certain things were included, certain things were excluded. Question: How was this media constructed?
2. Every media uses its own media LANGUAGE. Novels, plays, TV sitcoms, science fiction movies, oil paintings, comic books—all have their own unique language, rules, conventions. Question: What techniques were used to get my attention?
3. Different people EXPERIENCE media differently. The easiest illustration of this concept would be a particular style of music. People will have completely opposite experiences of the same style of music. Question: How might different people experience this media?
4. All media have embedded values and POINTS OF VIEW. There is no such thing as "values free" media. To even try to create "values free" media would itself be a value. Question: What points of view are presented/not presented in this media?
5. All media messages are constructed for PROFIT and/or POWER. Profit and power are neutral. It's what we do with them. Power is acquired through media mostly by getting media users to agree with an ideology. Question: Who created this message and why? Who pains, who gains?

 

A new movement called "Media Mindfulness" seeks to bring the faith component to Media Literacy. A new book for use with pre-teens, teens and adults called "Media Mindfulness" is available from St. Mary's Press: www.smp.org. Media Mindfulness adds two more questions:

 

6. What CHRISTIAN VALUES does this media support or not?
7. In light of my Christian beliefs, what will my RESPONSE be?

 

Still feel conflicted about media? Think of it this way. "Everything works together for the good of those who love God." That includes media! Make media work for you with the "3 D's."

DISCIPLESHIP—If we are disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, we want to honor, glorify and imitate Him in everything we do, yes? But the same way we don't ignore non-Christians, we don't ignore media that doesn't represent Jesus' way of life.

DISCERNMENT—God has given us so many tools for discernment, not just for making good choices in our lives, but also for discerning media: philosophy, theology, our minds, wills, hearts, consciences, imaginations, the Bible, the Church, mentors, etc. The more we know about our Catholic Faith (and also how media works), the better we will be able to discern our media experiences.

DISCIPLINE—Self-discipline, self-mastery. We need to be constantly asking ourselves: How is this particular media influencing my relationship with God, myself, my family, others, my enemies, Creation? Adjust accordingly.

 

In addition to Discipleship, Discernment and Discipline, we need to pray about and with media in order to stay strong in our own convictions in a pluralistic media world.

 

Media Literacy and Media Mindfulness is a lifelong journey because we are constantly having new media experiences and growing in our faith. There is too much at stake for us not to be media literate in today's media culture. As the National Directory for Catechesis states it: "For many people, experience itself is an experience of the media." And as the Center for Media Literacy puts it:

"Media: love it or hate it, it's not going away." 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SCREENWRITER ESZTERHAUS CONVERTS TO CATHOLICISM

Article published Saturday, August 23, 2008
A HOLLYWOOD PLOT TWIST
'Basic Instinct' author writes book about faith

Joe Eszterhas, who has written the screenplays for movie thrillers, now is the author of a book on faith: "Crossbearer."  ( ASSOCIATED PRESS/RON SCHWANE )

TOLEDO BLADE RELIGION EDITOR
Joe Eszterhas' latest book is a shocker, but not the kind that made him rich and famous.

The upcoming release from the man who penned dark thrillers such as Basic Instinct and Jagged Edge tells the story of his spiritual conversion and his newfound devotion to God and family.

In Crossbearer: A Memoir of Faith, to be published Sept. 2 by St. Martin's Press, Mr. Eszterhas describes how his life got turned around during the summer of 2001.

He and his second wife, Naomi, had just moved from Malibu to a suburb of Cleveland - where he had grown up; she was from nearby Mansfield. They felt Ohio would be a better, more wholesome place to raise their four boys (he had two grown children from his first marriage).

A month after the move, Mr. Eszterhas was diagnosed with throat cancer. Doctors at the Cleveland Clinic removed 80 percent of his larynx, put a tracheotomy tube in his throat, and told him he must quit drinking and smoking immediately.

At age 56, after a lifetime of wild living, Mr. Eszterhas knew it would be a struggle to change his ways.

One hot summer day after his surgery, walking through his tree-lined neighborhood in Bainbridge Township, Mr. Eszterhas reached a breaking point.

"I was going crazy. I was jittery. I twitched. I trembled. I had no patience for anything. … Every single nerve ending was demanding a drink and a cigarette," he wrote.

He plopped down on a curb and cried. Sobbed, even. And for the first time since he was a child, he prayed: "Please God, help me."

Mr. Eszterhas was shocked by his own prayer.

"I couldn't believe I'd said it. I didn't know why I'd said it. I'd never said it before," he wrote.

But he felt an overwhelming peace. His heart stopped pounding. His hands stopped twitching. He saw a "shimmering, dazzling, nearly blinding brightness that made me cover my eyes with my hands."

Like Saul on the road to Damascus, Mr. Eszterhas had been blinded by God. He stood up, wiped his eyes, and walked back home a new man.

In a phone interview this week, Mr. Eszterhas said it was "an absolutely overwhelming experience."

He went from doubting if he could make it through life without tobacco and alcohol, to knowing that he could "defeat myself and win."

He and Naomi have been faithfully attending Catholic Mass on Sundays ever since, and as the book title states, Joe carries the cross down the aisle. He asserts his nonconformity, however, by wearing jeans and Rolling Stones T-shirts when he does it. Despite the rebel attire, he says he carries the cross with more reverence than most.

Although he is a devout Catholic, Mr. Eszterhas writes bluntly of his disgust for priests who are pedophiles and bishops who have covered up for them. He and Naomi decided they could not, in good conscience, donate a dime to the church because of the clerical sexual abuse scandal.

He also writes about the inner turmoil he felt when he took his boys to catechism classes or other church events and kept a protective eye on them the whole time, making sure they were never alone with a priest.

And he complains about priests' homilies being boring and pointless.

When Mr. Eszterhas visited a nondenominational megachurch, he heard a sensational sermon. But he felt empty afterward, missing Holy Communion and the Catholic liturgy.

"It may have been a church full of pedophiles and criminals covering up other criminals' sins … it may have been a church riddled with hypocrisy, deceit, and corruption … but our megachurch experience taught us that we were captive Catholics," he wrote.

Mr. Eszterhas told The Blade that despite his mixed feelings over the church and the abuse scandal, the power of the Mass trumps his doubts and misgivings.

"The Eucharist and the presence of the body and blood of Christ is, in my mind, an overwhelming experience for me. I find that Communion for me is empowering. It's almost a feeling of a kind of high."

He said that living in the heartland, he sees how much Hollywood producers are out of touch with most Americans.

"I find it mind boggling that with nearly 70 percent of Americans describing themselves as Christians, and witnessing the success of The Passion of The Christ and The Chronicles of Narnia, that Hollywood still doesn't do the kinds of faith-based and family-value entertainment that people are desperate to see," Mr. Eszterhas said.

He has turned down hefty offers to write scripts for movies with sinister plots and dark themes like the 16 other ones he wrote that made it to the screen- some paying as much as $3 million a script.

Mr. Eszterhas said he spent too much of his life exploring the dark side of humanity and does not want to go there anymore.

He was born in Hungary during World War II, grew up in refugee camps, and then moved to the United States and lived in an impoverished neighborhood in Cleveland.

He worked as a police reporter in Cleveland and "was always fascinated with the darkness. I covered countless shootings, urban riots, and in several situations I was there before police were because I had a police radio and used to drift around the city until something happened," he said.

But after his spiritual transformation, he said, he had had enough of death, murder, blood, and chaos.

"Frankly my life changed from the moment God entered my heart. I'm not interested in the darkness anymore," he said. "I've got four gorgeous boys, a wife I adore, I love being alive, and I love and enjoy every moment of my life. My view has brightened and I don't want to go back into that dark place."

Mr. Eszterhas' love and appreciation for life was magnified even more last year when his surgeon told him he didn't need to schedule another visit.

"He used the word 'cured,' a word that oncologists generally don't use," Mr. Eszterhas said. "He said I didn't have to come back for any checks, that my tissue had regenerated to the point where you cannot only not tell that there was ever any cancer there, but you can't tell that there had been any surgery there.

"Naomi and I were, of course, overwhelmed when he told us. I think it's truly a miraculous blessing."

One miracle Mr. Eszterhas has hoped for but not seen since returning to Ohio is to see his beloved Cleveland Indians win the World Series. But he is using the Tribe's woes as a lesson in faith and patience for his children.

"I think that our deity may have a pretty nasty sense of humor," he said with a laugh.

His new book is evidence of Mr. Eszterhas' victory over writer's block, something that struck him after going sober. It was a difficult adjustment to write for the first time in his life without sipping wine or cognac.

But he was compelled to write Crossbearer as "a thank you to God" and "to tell the world what he has done for me."

When his wife finished the book, he said, she gave it a hug. "That's how I feel. I'm very proud of it."

- David Yonke