Seven Quick Takes Friday: Catholic Vote Style

 

I did the surfing, so you don’t have to. Here are the fruits of today’s writer’s block: The good, the bad, the beautiful, and the weird from around the Web this week.

1. Have you been paying attention to how young Catholics in France are rallying against gay marriage? Because you should.

 

 

This week, the French magazine, Nouvel Observateur, goes all National Geographic, exploring  the strange ways of young French Catholics who actually believe what the Church teaches.

Everyone thought they had disappeared, and they had indeed become invisible to most of us. But for the past six months, they have been resurfacing and taking to the streets relentlessly to protest against gay marriage. They use their networks to organize events and rallies, as well as candlelit sit-ins and vigils. As defenders of the so-called traditional family, they represent a large proportion of those who march against same-sex marriage.

“It is a real groundswell,” says Christine Pedotti, editor-in-chief at Témoignage chrétien (“Christian Testimony”), the only Catholic magazine to favor gay marriage. “These young conservative activists obey the Church hierarchy and are addicted to family values and genuflecting. This is the new face of the Church.”

Family values and genuflecting. How quaint.

2.  In Baltimore, a “sex fetish” convention slated to be held in a local community center was cancelled, after a court agreed with local protests.

Strangely enough, parents didn’t like the idea of classes on “erotic whipping, polyamory and rope bondage” being offered in the same place where their kids play soccer.

Don’t get too excited about the triumph of common sense though. Here’s what the attorney who sought the injunction against the convention had to say about the event:

 “We do not pass judgment on what it is they are electing to do; they just can’t do it in close proximity to children,” said attorney Susan Green.

My question: Why? Why can’t they pass judgment? Has it really become beyond the pale to think that whips and polyamory are not subjects in which nice people should be interested?

3. It’s not a myth: Liberal men are girly men.

 

The Daily Mail reports on a new study out of Denmark which concludes that “Physically strong men are more likely to have right-wing political views.” 

The figures revealed that men with higher upper-body strength were less likely to support left-wing policies on the redistribution of wealth.  But men with low upper-body strength were more likely to put their own self-interest aside and support a welfare state.

So much to say. So much that shouldn’t be said.

4. Worried you’re posting too many stories about the Faith on your Facebook page? Worry no more. 

In yesterday’s homily, Pope Francis called upon Catholics to become holy pains in the you-know-what and implore the Holy Spirit for…wait for it…”the grace to be annoying.”

“There are backseat Christians, right? Those who are well mannered, who do everything well, but are unable to bring people to the Church through proclamation and Apostolic zeal. Today we can ask the Holy Spirit to give us all this Apostolic fervor and to give us the grace to be annoying when things are too quiet in the Church, the grace to go out to the outskirts of life. The Church has so much need of this!…So let us ask the Holy Spirit for this grace of Apostolic zeal, let’s be Christians with apostolic zeal. And if we annoy people, blessed be the Lord. Onwards, as the Lord says to Paul, ‘take courage!’ ”

Easiest papal advice I’ve heard in a long time.

5. Verily Magazine, the best thing to come along for the women’s fashion industry since Anthropologie, shipped this week.

 

Packed between its lovely, glossy covers, you’ll find relevant, intelligent writing; clothing which proves my often-made point that stylish and modest are not mutually exclusive realities; and beautiful women who don’t look like they need to be given a sandwhich (or 10) poste haste.  I’ve ordered my subscription. Have you ordered yours?

6. A book recommendation:

Mary Eberstadt’s “How the West Really Lost God: A New Theory of Secularization.”

My review of the book ran in OSV last week. Unfortunately, it’s for subscribers’ eyes only, so I can’t link to it. But here’s a snippet:

According to Eberstadt, the trends that signal a decline in the traditional family—rising rates of out-of-wedlock births, cohabitation, and divorce, paired with falling rates of marriage and an ever-shrinking family size—aren’t simply the consequence of secularization. They also are part of the cause.

To prove her point, Eberstadt weaves together a vast array of sociological and demographic data, demonstrating that in ages both past and present, wedding rings and babies tend to pull women and men towards religious practice. So, where there are more marriages and more babies, there’s also “more God.” And where there are fewer marriages and fewer babies? Then, there’s “less God.”

In sum, the book is good—really good. And if you want a deeper , more data-rich understanding of why the practice of organized religion in the West is now in a free fall, you should read it.

7. Video of the week: “Art and Liturgy in Two Minutes”

The whole thing is quotable, but in sum: “A faithful celebration of the liturgy makes for a faithful and holy people of God?”—Abbot Michael Zielinski, OSB, bureau chief of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Celebration of the Sacraments.

Watch it. Share it.

11 thoughts on “Seven Quick Takes Friday: Catholic Vote Style

  1. Russell Kirk says:

    I know that ‘girly’ were intended as an insult, do perceive it as such, but also know that it shouldn’t be so. Such is predicated on the idea that we are assigned Proper Rôles (in a society, in a Great Chain of Being, by the party) and that not playing your assigned rôle meant that you were fundamentally _wrong_. We weren’t, and it isn’t…and even if we were assigned rôles, such would be morally vacuous in the absence of our prior informed agreement to such an assignment.

    As for 6: I’d be very interested in how she supports causality rather than correlation; some of what she’s written that I read seems prone to ‘post hoc ergo propter hoc’, but in the longer form of a book perhaps she is able to crunch some numbers for a proper, Bayes-informed, analysis.

    Thank-you for running a site that is still intelligible to someone who disagrees with you strongly on (probably) just about everything

  2. *Whoops! – Meant to say “data” instead of “date”.

    I agree with some of the other commenters here. The post about liberals being “girly” was a little insensitive and/or unnecessary. As much as we don’t like to admit it, guys have feelings, too, and I think this post cuts a little too close for some men (even though, yes, the data comes from a real study).

    To put it into perspective I think it’d be equally insensitive to say something like “It’s not a myth: Liberal women ARE fat women”. That might not be a perfect analogy, but I think it will help women realize what many men would feel by this post.

  3. I agree with some of the other commenters here. The post about liberals being “girly” was a little insensitive and/or unnecessary. As much as we don’t like to admit it, guys have feelings, too, and I think this post cuts a little too close for some men (even though, yes, the date comes from a real study).

    To put it into perspective I think it’d be equally insensitive to say something like “It’s not a myth: Liberal women ARE fat women”. That might not be a perfect analogy, but I think it will help women realize what many men would feel by this post.

  4. M says:

    I really wanted to share this post on facebook. I can’t now because of #3. Way to alienate a whole group of people to your otherwise positive post. Yeah, maybe you meant it as a joke….but then are all your other points a joke too? How do you expect “liberals” to even be attracted to your other excellent points if you insult them in one fell swoop.

    Uuugh. CV one step forward and two steps back. If you guys don’t learn to be more charitable, you are simply doing the Catholic Church a diservice by calling yourselves “Catholic” vote.

  5. joey says:

    “3. It’s not a myth: Liberal men are girly men. “Physically strong men are more likely to have right-wing political views.”

    The figures revealed that men with higher upper-body strength were less likely to support left-wing policies on the redistribution of wealth. But men with low upper-body strength were more likely to put their own self-interest aside and support a welfare state.”

    Seriously? So not having a strong upper body means that a man is girly? This is completely inaccurate and inappropriate. You perpetuating stereotypes.

    1. Joey, relax. Lighten up. It’s Friday.

      1. John says:

        Got to admit, I agree with Joey. But that’s probably because I’m a skinny guy who rides a bike. Hey, at least I’m conservative.

      2. joey says:

        Emily, really? A so-called Catholic blogger perpetuating stereotypes (an un-Christian action) is telling me to relax because I brought up a valid point? Why not admit to that point and explain it?

        1. Joey, it was an amusing study because it perpetuates stereotypes. Being Catholic doesn’t mean we can’t laugh at silly things like that study. If it makes you feel any better, I promise to include something perpetuating stereotypes of redheads next time I do something like this. Then you can laugh at me. K?

          1. joey says:

            again, my post was denied. Seems like you like to silence those who don’t agree with you. Nice to know where you stand.

    2. Trina says:

      Joey -My goodness. This was an actual study published in a psychology journal in the U.K. It showed a strong tendency toward this fact. Discussed possible societal evolutionary reasons (men at one time HAD to be physically stronger and more self-reliant, etc., to survive). But, yes, lighten up. No one is saying all physically “weaker” men are girly or liberal. Just a higher percentage of them. ;)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.