The Privilege of

Being a Woman

ALI CE V O N H I L D E B R A N D

A V E-
MARIA
UNIVERSITY

Sapientia Press
of Ave Maria University
C opyright © 2002 by Alice von H ildebrand. All rights reserved.
03 04 05 07 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7

N o p a rt of this publication m ay be reproduced o r transm itted in

any form or means, electronic o r mechanical, including photog­
raphy, recording, or any other inform ation storage or retrieval
system, w ithout perm ission in w riting from the publisher.

R equests for perm ission to make copies o f any p a rt of the w ork

should be directed to:

Sapientia Press
o f Ave M aria U niversily
5050 Ave M aria Blvd.
Ave M aria, F L 34142
888-343-8607

E d ito ria l a n d P ro d u c tio n

D om inic Aquila, P h.D .
H enry Russell, Ph.D .
D iane E riksen

C over Im age
F ra Angelico (1387—1455), The Coronation o f the Virgin
Photo: H . L ew andow ski
© R eunion des M usees N atio n au x /A rt Resource, N Y
Louvre, Paris, France

C o v er D esig n
Eloise A nagnost

P rin ted in the U nited S tates o f America.

L ib rary o f C ongress C ontrol N um ber: 2002103817

ISB N -13: 978-0-9706106-7-6

D E DI CA T E D WI TH L O V I N G GRATI TUDE
TO MY DEAR FRI ENDS W H O
ALL LOVE TO BE W O M E N

Alice A nn Grayson, Barbara Henkeld, Joanie Sm ith,

IVendy Teichert, and Rode Grimm Teichert
 Contentd

PART I
Argumentd Agauidt the Privilege
o f Being a W om an..............................................................1
S ecu lar A rg u m e n ts ................................................... 1
C h ristian ity a n d A rgum ents
A g ainst P riv ileg e......................................................11

PART II
Arguments fo r the Privilege
o f Being a W om an........................................................... 15
T he S u p e rn a tu ra l V ie w .........................................15

PART III
From Paganism to Modern Valued:
Denigration o f Woman ...................................................23

PART IV
Woman: The Privileged S e x ......... .......................... 35
C ons a n d P ro s o f W e a k n e s s ...............................36
C o n s ................................................................ 36
P r o s ........................................................................42

V
 PART V
The Trarufiguration o f Weakness:
The Incarnation................................................ 53

PART VI
Women'*) Supernatural Middio n ....................................59

PART VII
Women and Feeling,)........................................................ 67

PART VIII
The M ydtery o f the Female B o d y...................................81
T he M y stery o f F em in in ity ..................................88
M a te rn ity ...................................................................95

PART IX
M ary and the Female S ex...............................................99
 PART I

Argum ents A gain st the Privilege

o f Being a Woman

SECULAR A R G U ME N T S
H o w can it be a privilege for a w om an to be called
“the second sex” (dexud dequior)', to be considered less
talented, less strong, less creative, less interesting, less
intelligent, less artistic th an h er male counterpart?
All g re a t creatio ns o f m an k in d have b een m ade
b y m en: in arch itectu re , in fine arts, in theology, in
philosophy, in science, in technology. T he h isto ry
o f th e w o rld is m ostly th e h isto ry o f th e achieve­
m ents o f h u m an m ales; from tim e to tim e, a fem ale
is m entioned, b u t she is th e n com m ended fo r h er
“m an ly ” qualities, o r fo r having “a virile m in d .”1
S im one de B eau v o ir a n d S im one W eil are fre ­
qu en tly p raised for this sam e reason. O n the other
hand, w e look dow n u p o n som eone w ho is desig­
n ated as “effem inate” o r “w om anish.”
A c co rd in g to statistics, m o st peo p le p re fe r to
have a bo y b ab y th a n to have a girl. This is tru e not

1
on ly in societies like C hina, w h e re tra d itio n a lly
g irls h ave b een a b a n d o n e d a n d even m u rd ered .
T oday one m illion six h u n d re d th o u san d b ab y girls
are ab a n d o n ed .2 M o re female th a n m ale babies are
ab o rted. N o t long ago, th e New York Tim&d re p o rte d
th a t in K o rea w om en feel guilty to w a rd th e ir h u s­
b an d s w h en th ey p ro d u ce “on ly ” girls. T hey do not
seem to k n o w th at, biologically speaking, it is the
m ale w ho d eterm ines the sex o f the child!
W h o w ould choose to have a body w hich, from
th e tim e o f p u b e rty on, can be burdensom e, can
cause discom fort a n d even severe pain? W ho w ould
choose to be n au seated for w eeks, a n d som etim es
m onths, d u rin g p reg n an cy ? W h o w o u ld choose to
give b irth in agonizing pain? W h en th e O ld T esta­
m en t w ishes to illu stra te severe trials, it usually
refers to a w om an in labor.3
M en w a n t w om en to exist, b u t th ey do no t w a n t
to b e w o m en them selves.^ S im one de B eau v o ir
w rites th a t ” ... m en are h u m an beings; w om en are
ju s t fem ales.”5 S he claim s th a t w om en cannot tra n ­
scend, an d th a t th ey “p ro d u ce n o th in g .”6 W om en
are “p u re o b jects” w ho exist in o rd e r to satisfy the
cravings o f the m ale sex. A ccording to her, w om en
a re “d isg u ste d b y th e ir o w n se x .”7 T h ey lo ath e
b eing w om en. T his is w h a t G. K. C h esterto n h ad in
m ind w h e n he w ro te th a t a fem inist is som eone
w h o "dislikes the ch ief fem inine characteristics.”8
As a result, th e ag en da of fem inists, w hile anim ated

2
b y a h a tre d o f m en, aim s a t virilizing w om en so th a t
th ey can gain control over th e ir bodies, th eir des­
tiny. O n ce lib erated from biological ties, w om en will
be able to develop th eir talents w hich, for centuries,
have b een cru sh ed b y social taboos. A ccording to
de B eauvoir, th e sc a rc ity o f fem ale acco m p lish ­
m ents is to be explained “b y the general m ediocrity
o f th e ir situ atio n __ ”9
T he leading feminists encourage th eir disciples to
becom e m asters o f th eir destiny instead o f being sub­
ject to a q u irk o f nature. T hey m ust liberate them ­
selves an d becom e “free.” In o rd er to achieve this
aim , fem inists p ro claim th e id e n tity o f m en a n d
w om en. T he w iser C hesterton w rote, “T here is no th ­
ing so certain to lead to inequality as identity.”1®
B lu n tly speaking, w om en have traditionally been
co n sid ered “in ferio r” to m en. This is the dictate o f
n a tu re : “A n a to m y is d e stin y .”11 To p le a d th e ir
cause, fem inist scholars have b een efficient at u n ­
earth in g n asty th in gs th a t m en have said o r w ritten
ab o u t w om en. T h at m an y fam ous m en have spoken
disparagingly o f w om en can n o t be denied. A ristotle
refers to fem ales as “deficient m ales.”12 In the O ld
T estam en t th e re are n u m ero u s statem en ts ab o u t
w om en th a t are fa r from com plim entary. Som e d e­
serve to be quoted: “A ny w ickedness b u t no t the
w ickedness o f a w ife.”1'1 “I w o u ld ra th e r dw ell w ith
a lion a n d a d rag o n th a n dw ell w ith an evil w ife.”14
“F ro m a w om an sin h ad its beginning, a n d because

3
 o f h er w e all d ie.’’15 “A n evil wife is an ox yoke
w hich chafes; taking hold o f h er is like grasping a
sco rp io n .’’15 “It is a w om an w ho brings sham e and
disgrace.”17 “O n e m an am ong a th o u san d I found,
b u t a w om an am ong all these I have n o t found. ’’18
"A m an w ho w ishes y o u ill is b e tte r th a n a w om an
w h o w ishes y o u w ell.”19
T he T o rah does n o t sp ea k fa v o ra b ly o f a
w o m an ’s intellect: "Rather b u rn Torah th a n try to
ex p lain it to a w o m a n .”20 S om e F a th e rs o f th e
C h u rch follow suit. T he g re a t S aint J o h n C hrysos­
tom w rote: “A m ong all w ild beasts, th ere is none to
be fo u n d w h ic h is m ore h a rm fu l th a n the
w o m an .”21 A ccording to L uther, the m eaning o f a
w o m an ’s life is to procreate: “the w o rk a n d w o rd of
G od tell us clearly th a t w om en m ust be used for
m arriage o r fo r p ro stitu tio n . If w om en get tired an d
die o f bearing, th ere is no h arm in th at: let them die
so long as th ey bear: th e y are m ade for that. ”22
T he secu larist view is h ard ly m ore flattering. In
H am let, W illiam S h a k e sp e a re w ro te th e often-
q u o te d w o rd s: "F railty , th y nam e is w o m a n .”23
J o h n M ilto n w rites th a t “th e w om an is a p re tty
m istak e.”24 (W h at should be said, w e m ight ask, o f
a w o m an w h o is n o t p re tty ? ) K a n t—in one of his
"h u m b le” m o o d s—w rites th a t "the w om an is less
talen ted , m orally in ferio r to m an .”25 W ith Teutonic
b ru ta lity F ried rich N ietzsche w rites, “W h en y o u go
to a w om an, do no t forget y o u r w h ip .”25 A rth u r

4
S c h o p e n h a u e r speaks o f w o m en w ith contem pt:
“W o m en a re child ish, friv o lo u s a n d s h o rt­
s ig h te d .. .big ch ild ren all th e ir life long.”23 W ith
sarcasm a n d w it, he gives v en t to his intense dislike
o f his m other. H is essay on w om en is a long litany
of negative fem ale attrib u tes. N o t only does he d e­
spise a w o m an ’s intellect, b u t he even objects to
calling w o m en “th e fair sex .” A ccording to him,
w om en are “th e u naesth etic sex.”28
A lexandre D u m as w rites th a t “A ccording to the
Bible, w om an w as the last thing G od m ade. It m ust
have b een a S atu rd ay [sic] night: clearly he w as
tire d .”29 L o rd B yron lam ents the fact th a t w hereas
m en cannot stan d w om en, th ey cannot live w ith o u t
them .30 A G erm an thinker, today totally forgotten,
b y th e nam e o f W eininger, m ade headlines b y w rit­
ing th a t “w o m en ’s m inds are p u re nonsense.”31 His
b o o k w as re p rin te d tw en ty -fiv e tim es. S ig m u n d
F re u d m ade th e in terestin g “scientific” discovery
th a t every little girl is b o rn w ith “penis envy,” w hich
is long before she could possibly k n o w th a t this
org an exists.
Yet fem inists carefully refrain from m entioning
th e b e a u tifu l statem en ts th a t m en have m ade
th ro u g h o u t histo ry such as “she [a good wife] is far
m ore precious th a n jew els;”32 or “do not deprive
y o u rse lf o f a w ise a n d good wife; for h e r charm is
w o rth m ore th a n gold.”33 D a n te sings the praise of
the donna angelhcata (w om an view ed as an angel). H e

5
 im m ortalized B eatrice, his one g re a t love, w hose
personality is a light a n d an inspiration in the p o e t’s
life, and w h o se m ission is to lead him to G od.
S h akespeare’s fem ale characters are often sublime.
L am artine refers to w om en as “angeo morteU, creation
divine” (“m ortal angels, divine creatio n ’’). Schiller
rh a p so d iz e s a b o u t th e fem ale sex .0'1 T h e o d o r
H a e c k e r claim s th a t n a tu re m ade w om an m ore p e r­
fect th a n m an because she is m ore inclined to love
a n d to give h erself.33 T he n o b lest c h a ra c te rs in
C lau d el’s plays are w om en (e.g., Violaine, Sygne).
F o rce d to face this tru th , de B eauvoir in terp re ts it
in h e r fem inist way. S he w rites: “B ut if his w om en
[C la u d e l’s] a re th u s re m a rk a b ly d ev o ted to th e
heroism o f sanctity, it is above all because C laudel
still view s th em in a m asculine p ersp ectiv e.”36 As
sanctity is dev alu ed in de B eauvoir's eyes (as a p o o r
s u b s titu te fo r g re a t ac h ie v em en ts), th e h ig h est
praise th a t can be given anyone m ale o r female —
nam ely holiness — is, to h er m ind, only a left-handed
com plim ent.
T h a t su ch d iv e rg e n t sta te m e n ts can be m ade
ab o u t w om en can find su n d ry explanations. It is
usually tru e th a t an im pure m an, o r one hooked on
p o rn o g rap h y , will look do w n u p o n w om en. O n the
o th er han d , a m an steeped in th e su p ern atu ral will
look u p to th e sex th a t w as h o n o red to give birth to
th e S avior o f th e w orld. In th e end, u n w a rra n te d
generalizations are typical o f shallow m inds. T hat

6
som e w o m en are "big c h ild re n th e ir w h o le life
long,” th a t som e w om en are refinedly w icked, th a t
some are stupid, a n d so on are as dull as statem ents
claim ing th a t som e m en are bestial, som e are brutal,
some are stu p id (because stupidity, against w hich
th e gods them selves fight in vain, is p re tty fairly
d istrib u ted betw een th e tw o sexes).
B u t th e n eg a tiv e sta te m e n ts m ade a b o u t the
“w e ak er sex ”—h ig hlighted a n d endlessly repeated
b y fe m in ists—h av e gained c u rre n c y a n d are the
w a te r driving th e ir mill. S uch w o rd s are no d o u b t
p artially responsible for this rev o lu tio n aiy m ove­
m ent th a t has gained so m uch im petus in th e con­
tem p o rary w orld.

A c co rd in g to fem inists, u n d e r societal p re ssu re

w om en have for centuries accepted th eir “inferior­
ity,” and in m any countries they still do. B ut now, in
"developed nations, ” the kairoJ is ripe (the tim e is
ripe) for a reassessm ent o f this hum iliating situa­
tion. A w are o f the injustice th a t th ey have been sub­
jected to, fem inists now claim th eir right to equal
footing w ith th e male sex. This aim is supposedly to
be achieved b y com peting w ith m en in the w o rk
force, instead o f being exiled in Kirche, K m c he, and
Kinder (th e th re e K ’s o f th e G erm an language:
chu rch , k itch en , a n d ch ild ren ). A ccording to de
Beauvoir, lib eration from the m enial tasks o f the

7
 hom e is the g reat noble achievem ent o f socialism
(by w hich she m eans Soviet R ussia).37 She w rites,
“...th e fate o f w om an an d th a t o f socialism are in ti­
m ately b o u n d __ ”38 This claim is hotly contested by
co n tem p o rary R ussian a u th o r T atiana G oricheva.
S peaking ab o u t th e situation of w om en in Soviet
R ussia, she w rites: “A nd w om en am ong us suffer
tw ice if n o t th ree tim es as m uch as m en.”39
T h a t som e w om en have been abom inably treated
b y som e m en ca n n o t a n d should n o t be denied.
K ierk eg aard w rites, “W h a t abom inations has the
w o rld n o t seen in th e relationship betw een m an and
w o m a n —th a t she, alm ost like an anim al, w as a d e­
spised creatu re com pared to th e male, a creature of
an o th er species.”^0 C h esterto n too adm its this fact:
“I do n o t d en y th a t w om en have been w ronged and
even to rtu red ; b u t I d o u b t if th ey w ere ever to rtu red
so m uch as th ey are to rtu re d now b y the ab su rd
m o d ern attem p t to m ake them dom estic em presses
a n d com petitive clerks at the sam e tim e.” T he solu­
tio n he offers is “...to d estro y the tyranny. T hey
[the fem inists] w a n t to destroy the w om anhood.”^1
T he abuse th a t m any w om en have b een subjected
to has often been illustrated in literature: L et us re ­
call th e b ru tal treatm en t th a t th e crippled sister of
L eb yadkin, in D o sto ev sk y ’s The PoMedded, is su b ­
jected to b y h e r ru thless an d m ostly d ru n k brother.
O bviously th e g reat R ussian w rite r w as referring to
real facts. This sad story has often been tru e in the

8
p ast a n d is still tru e today. T h at m ale chauvinism is
nothing b u t a com bination o f childish m ale pride
an d b ru tality can n ot be contested. Y et it seems evi­
d en t th a t even in the face o f th eir physical vu ln era­
bility, g iv en th e ir g re a te r sensitivity, th e ir m ore
subtle intuitions, th eir talen t for feeling them selves
into others, w om en have g re ater possibilities o f u p ­
lifting o r o f h u rtin g o th e rs th a n th o se usu ally
g ra n te d to th e opposite sex.
It is n o te w o rth y th a t in S irach, th e a u th o r is elo­
q u e n t in sp eak in g a b o u t the w ickedness th a t w ives
m ay possess since original sin, b u t no m ention is
m ade o f th e b ru tality, selfishness, a n d h ard n ess of
h e a rt o f som e h u sb a n d s. T h e a u th o r p ro b a b ly
w ish ed to d ra w o u r atte n tio n to th e fact th a t w h en
w om en are w ick ed a n d choose to tre a d on w h a t
S ty en K ierk eg aa rd calls “th e p a th o f p e rd itio n ,”
th ey often su rp a ss th e w ick ed n ess o f th eir male
coun terp art. L a B ruyere w rites, “W om en are all in
ex tre m es, e ith e r b e tte r o r w o rse th a n m e n .”42
K ie rk e g a a rd d efen d s th e sam e th esis: “...i t b e ­
longs to h e r n a tu re to be m ore p e rfe c t a n d m ore
im p e rfe c t th a n m an. I f one w o u ld in d ic a te th e
p u re s t a n d m o st p e rfe c t q u ality , one says, "a
w o m an ’; if one w o u ld in d icate th e w eak est, th e
m ost feeble thing, one says ‘a w o m an ’; if one w ould
give a notion o f a spiritual quality raised above all
sensuousness, one says ‘a w om an'; if one w o u ld
give a notion o f the sensuous, one says ’a w o m an ’; if

9
 one w ould indicate innocence in all its lofty g re a t­
ness, one says ‘a w o m an ’; if one w ould p o in t to the
depressing feeling o f sin, one says a w o m an .’ In a
c e rtain sense, th ere fo re , w o m an is m o re p e rfe c t
th an m a n __ ”43 N ietzsche follows suit: “dad volLkom-
mene Weib idt ein hoeherer typud aL> der voltkommene
M a n n ” (“th e p erfec t w om an stands higher th a n a
p erfect m a n ”).44 B u t he also w rites th a t “dad Weib
idt undaeglich vieL boeder aid der M a n n ” (“w o m an is
m uch m ore w ick ed th a n m a n ”).45
B u t is th e fem inist response to these inequalities
a n d in ju stice s a so lu tio n w h ic h w ill b en e fit th e
C h u rch , society at large, m arriage, th e family, an d
w om en them selves? U nw ittingly, th e fem inists ac­
know ledge th e su p erio rity o f th e m ale sex b y w ish­
ing to becom e like m en. T h ey foolishly w a n t to
alter in equality ra th e r th a n to achieve tru th o r ju s­
tice. F em ininity is a linchpin o f hu m an life; once it
is u p ro o ted , th e consequences are disastrous. In
fact, experience p roves th a t fem inism benefits m en
a n d h arm s w om en.46
M an , being free, is able to give an ap p ro p riate
resp o n se to every situation; he is equally free to
give a w ro n g re sp o n se . H u m a n n a tu re b ein g
w o u n d e d b y original sin, m en are m ore p ro n e to
give w ro n g resp o nses th a n valid ones. W hereas w e
can sin w ith o u t an y o n e’s help, w e cannot do good
w ith o u t G o d ’s grace, for w h ich w e m ust hum bly
pray. This is som ething th a t m an y fail to do.

10
CHRI STI ANI TY A N D A RGUME NT S
A GA I NS T THE PRI VI LEGE
It w as de B eau v o ir’s belief th a t the Bible and, p a r­
ticularly, C h ristian ideology ca rry a heavy resp onsi­
bility for th e d eplorable a n d hum iliating situation
th a t w om en find them selves i n / 7 A ccording to h er
read ing , from G enesis on, w o m an has b een d e ­
clared to be m a n ’s servant. She should be obedient,
subm issive, a n d accep t h e r inferiority w ith o u t re ­
volt. To be in a su b o rd in ate position is G od's will
for her. T his is how she w ill achieve salvation. She
will be ex alted to the ex ten t th a t she acknow ledges
an d accepts h er servitude. A dam w as created b e­
fore Eve. To de Beauvoir, this signifies th a t she w as
an afterth o u g h t. She w as form ed from A dam 's rib
a n d w as created to supply com panionship to som e­
one w h o w as feeling hopelessly lonesom e.
She w as the one w ho y ield ed to th e serpent's
crafty prom ise; she w as the one w ho gave the for­
bidden fru it to h e r h u sb an d and th ere b y caused his
ruin a n d ours. A lthough bo th culprits w ere severely
punished, b y loss of the life o f grace, by loss of p re ­
tern a tu ral gifts th a t h ad been g ran ted to th e m —in­
clu d in g im m o rta lity o f th e body, freed o m from
sickness a n d p ain —she w as m ore severely chastised
th an h er husband. True, he w as condem ned to earn
his b re ad w ith th e sw eat o f his b row (a punishm ent
w hich millions of w om en share w ith m en), b u t she
w as p u n ish e d in th e v e ry sp h e re th a t w as h e r

11
 g lo ry —m aternity. F ro m n o w on, she w a s c o n ­
dem ned to give b irth in pain a n d anguish. M o re­
over, she w as d e c la re d to b e “su b ject to h e r
husband. ” H e r status o f inferiority w as sealed.
A ccording to de Beauvoir, this inferiority is con­
firm ed in th e N e w Testam ent. H as n o t M a ry d e ­
clared h erself to be “th e h an d m aid o f th e L o rd ? ”
S he w rites, “As servant, w om an is entitled to the
m ost sp len d id d eification.”^ M a ry is p ra ise d for
h e r o b ed ien ce a n d subm ission. S he is re w a rd e d
w ith becom ing th e m o th er o f the S avior b y d eclar­
ing h erself to be “th e han d m aid o f th e L o rd .” A c­
co rd in g to th e F re n c h fem inist, h e r final defeat is
sealed w hen, afte r giving b irth to a m ale child, she
kneels in fro n t o f H im a n d adores H im . This act of
ad o ratio n co n stitu tes th e “ultim ate m ale v ic to ry .”^
D e B e a u v o ir ta k e s th e freed o m o f m ak in g th is
k n e e lin g a d d itio n to S a in t L u k e ’s G ospel. T he
E v an g elist only tells us th a t she “...w ra p p e d H im
in sw addling cloths, an d p u t H im in a m anger.... ”50
M oreover, th e F ren c h fem inist “fo rg ets” to m ention
th a t S ain t P au l tells us th a t aLL knees should b en d in
fro n t o f th e S avior and, as knees have no sex, m en
a re d efin itely in clu d ed .51 T he hum ble sh ep h erd s
w ere th en inform ed th at " ...to y o u is born this day
in th e city o f D avid, a S av io u r...."52 These simple
m en hastened to give hom age to the N ew born King.
T h e a ris to c ra tic M agi follow ed su it a n d S ain t
M a tth e w in form s us th a t “ ...th e y fell dow n a n d

12
w o rsh ip ed H im .”53 She also forgets th a t if all knees
should b en d in fro n t o f th e Savior, all heads should
bow in fro n t o f H is m other.5^
T he fem inists’ re ad in g o f th e Bible is inevitably
th w a r te d b y th e ir p h ilo so p h y ; in fact, th e y are
rew ritin g this in sp ired book according to th e ir ow n
subjective “in sp iratio n .” In th e long run, it leads
them parad ox ically to place w om en at the apex of
creation and to proclaim th e su p erio rity o f th e fe­
m ale sex. G od becom es a She, an d C h rist will be
re b ap tized C hrista! W ith a secularistic view, the
w a r betw een th e sexes is inevitable.

13
 PART II

Argumentd fo r the Privilege

o f Being a Woman

THE SUPERNATURAL V I E W
In o rd e r to u n d ersta n d the greatness o f a w o m a n s
mission, w e m ust open o u r m inds a n d h earts to th e
m essage o f th e sup ern atural. It is th e k ey th a t will
reveal to us th e greatness o f femininity. It is one
th in g to re a d a text; it is an o th er to in te rp re t it co r­
rectly. All th e argum ents w hich seem to favor the
thesis th a t th e Bible has been discrim inating against
w om en from th e v ery beginning can easily be re ­
versed b y in terp retin g th e sacred tex t w ith th e eyes
o f faith.
T h at m en an d w om en are perfectly equal in dig­
n ity —b o th b eing m ade to G o d ’s im age a n d like­
n e ss—cannot be contested. B ut to be created last
does not indicate inferiority. As a m atter o f fact, it
could be arg u ed th a t there is an ascending line in
creation: from inanim ate matter, to plants, low er ani­
mals, m ammals, m an, an d finally, w om an. O bviously

15
w e a re n o t in ferrin g th a t w om an, b ein g c reated
last, is su p e rio r to m an. W e only w ish to sh o w th a t
th e arg u m e n t u sed to p ro v e h e r “in fe rio rity ” is n o t
valid a n d can be tu rn e d o n its head.
T he fact th a t E v e ’s b o d y w as fa sh io n ed from
A d am ’s rib can also easily be in te rp re te d as a sign
o f special dig n ity a n d preciousness: for to b e m ade
from th e b o d y o f a hu m an p erso n (m ade in G o d ’s
im age a n d likeness) is definitely n o b ler th a n being
fashioned from the d u st o f the earth.
Indeed, the punishm ent m eted out to Eve, as de
B eauvoir points out, w as particularly severe. As m en­
tioned above, w h en referring to excruciating pains,
the O ld Testam ent m entions the pangs o f childbirth.
But, in the light o f redem ption (w hich has given a
sublim e m eaning to suffering), to suffer agony to
bring another hum an being into the w orld is a p re ­
m onition o f the sufferings o f C hrist w hose blood has
redeem ed us. It intim ates th a t if Eve carries a heavy
responsibility for the tragedy o f original sin, the new
Eve will play a cardinal role in the w o rk o f redem p­
tion. Saint A ndrew of C rete w rites: “The w om en a p ­
plaud, for if at ano ther tim e it w as a w om an w ho was
th e im prudent occasion o f sin, now too it is a w om an
w h o b rin g s in th e first fru its o f salv atio n .”®5
K ierkegaard w rites: “it is m y conviction th a t if it w as
a w om an th a t ru ined man, it w as w om an also th at
has fairly an d honestly m ade reparation a n d still does
so__ ”56 M ore will be said about this later.

16
h o n o r w om en. T he fo u rth station p ictures the S av­
ior m eeting H is beloved m other; n o t a w o rd is said
ab o u t th is h ea rtb rea k in g encounter, b u t th e faithful
are ch a lle n g ed to m ed itate re v e re n tly u p o n th is
scene o f ultim ate love a n d ultim ate sorrow w hich
re n d ers w o rd s m eaningless. Sim on o f C yrene did
in d eed help c a rry C hrist's cross, b u t S aint L uke
tells us explicitly th a t “he w as fo rced ” to do so.57
T he holy w om en certainly envied H im : H ow they
w o u ld have w elcom ed the possibility o f p arta k in g
physically in th e sufferings o f th e one th ey loved so
ardently. V eronica piously w ipes h er S a v io rs face.
T h e w om en o f Je ru sa le m w eep over th e fate o f th e
H o ly O n e u n ju stly condem ned to d ea th w hile the
soldiers b ru ta lly m istreat H im . T he holy w om en
a re all a sse m b led a t th e foot o f th e cro ss. N o
w om an w as privileged to see C hrist transfigured on
M o u n t Tabor, b u t they w ere th ere a t the C rucifix­
ion. T his is —once a g a in —deeply m eaningful: T hey
w ere n o t given to see H im transfigured; b u t they
w ere p erm itted to see H im "bruised for o u r iniqui­
ties, sm itten b y G od a n d afflicted.”^ T he apostles
h a d fled. S ain t J o h n —th e disciple J e s u s loved —
did com e back; a n d it w as to him th a t th e dying
S avior confided H is m o th er w ith the w ords: “This
is y o u r m o th er.”
T he first w itness of the resurrection w as a wom an:
M a ry M agdalen. Typically enough, the apostles re ­
fused to believe h e r testim ony, m aking th e foolish

18
re m a rk th a t “it w as ju st w o m an ’s ta lk .” S he k n ew
th a t she h ad b een privileged to see th e risen L o rd
a n d d id n o t try to justify herself. She k n ew th e O n e
she loved w o u ld defend h e r b y ap p earin g to those
w h o se faith h a d faltered. O n e likes to th in k th a t th e
apostles later apologized to M a ry M ag d alen for re ­
jecting h er testimony, b u t H oly S cripture is silent on
this point; th ere are secrets th a t will only be revealed
in eternity. She certainly did no t ask for apologies (a
tru e C hristian never solicits them ), w h en h e r h eart
w as overflow ing w ith the joy th a t “H e has risen from
th e d ead ,” never to die again. She k new H e w as the
co n q u ero r o f death, now a triu m p h an t victor. M a ry
M a g d a le n b eliev e d m ore stro n g ly b e c a u se she
loved m ore.
In th e Apocalypse, once again, th e role o f w om en in
th e N ew Testam ent is gloriously highlighted. Saint
J o h n w as g ran ted a vision o f a w om an as b rig h t as
the sun, crow ned w ith stars. M ysterious as this sa­
cred w riting is, once again w e Eire given a chance to
see how grossly un fair a n d u tterly unscholarly it is to
accuse C hristianity o f having denigrated w om en an d
assigned to them an insignificant role.
As soon as w e ab an d o n a secularistic in te rp re ta ­
tio n o f th e Bible, w e can perceive th at, from a su ­
p e rn a tu ra l p o in t o f view, women are actually granted a
privileged position in th e eco n o m y o f re d em p tio n .
T hose w h o p e rsist in w e arin g secularistic lenses
have eyes a n d do n o t see, have ears a n d do not

19
hear. F o r th e B ible ca n n o t be u n d e rsto o d ex cep t in
a n attitu d e o f hu m ble receptivity, th a t is, “on o n e’s
k n ee s,” (as K ierk eg aard p u ts it). S o-called “b ib li­
cal” sch olars m ay k n o w A ram aic a n d G re ek b u t
n e v e rth e le ss ra d ic a lly m isu n d e rs ta n d th e d ivine
m essage, becau se th e ir “sch o larsh ip ” has w a rp e d
th e ir faith. A ta c it refusal to receive G o d ’s m es­
s a g e — b ecau se o f in tellectu al p r id e —is p u n ish ed
b y blindness.
G ra n ted th a t w om en have often b een denigrated,
hum iliated, a n d looked dow n upon in the course o f
h u m an history, w e m ust keep in m ind th a t th e cul­
p rits are alw ays individual m en, tainted by original
sin a n d anxious to place them selves above others,
often in o rd e r to com pensate for th eir ow n m edioc­
rity.59 O n e th in g is certain: T he C atholic C hurch,
she w h o has elevated w om en to an ex trao rd in ary
dignity, is an d alw ays has b een a convenient scape­
goat. It is psychologically so satisfying to find a n in­
stitu tio n to blam e fo r all th e evils afflicting th e
w orld, w hile th e accuser w rap s him self com fortably
in th e m an tle o f blam elessness! Ig n o ra n t people
stu b b o rn ly refu se to m ake a distinction b etw een
H e r H oliness as B ride o f C h rist a n d H oly Teacher
a n d th e often pitiful actions o f h er w a y w ard an d re ­
bellious children. T he C h u rch g ran ts all h er chil­
d ren th e m eans ol achieving holiness—but dhe cannot
force them to become holy. It is no tew o rth y th a t the
C h u rch is at tim es censured for abusing h e r au th o r-

20
ity b y “im posing” h e r dogm atic a n d m oral teaching
on h e r children, w ith o u t consulting them ! B u t the
n e x t m om ent, h e r ac cu sers criticize h e r fo r n o t
using h e r a u th o rity to force h e r children to live ac­
cording to th e G ospel.60

T he d en ig ratio n o f w om en is clearly a sad conse­

qu en ce o f original sin which had subverted the hierarchy
o f values. B y w ish in g to “becom e eq u a l to G o d ”
(w ith o u t G od), A dam a n d E ve w ere, in fact, rev o lt­
ing against th e ir creaturehood, th a t is, th e ir to tal
dep en d en ce u p o n G od. H e w as th e creator; th e y
w ere H is subjects. O rig in al sin w as a sin o f pride,
o f disobedience, o f irreverence, a n d o f m etaphysi­
cal revolt th a t led to an inversion o f th e h iera rch y
o f values.
B y a rro g a n tly d e c la rin g th e m se lv e s e q u a l to
G od, A dam a n d E ve w e re w aging w a r on th is h ie r­
archy. A n d once this equilibrium w as b ro k en , it
b ro u g h t in its tra in a w hole series o f d isastro u s
consequences, particularly ominous fo r women. J u s t
as o u r p a re n ts ’ souls rev o lted ag a in st G od, th e ir
bodies rev o lted ag ain st th e ir souls, to w h ich th e y
h a d b ee n su b ject. A n d th e y re a liz e d “th a t th e y
w ere n a k e d .” In o th er w o rd s — a n d this has b een
b e a u tifu lly c o m m e n te d u p o n b y o u r H o ly F a ­
t h e r —lu st m ade its en tra n ce into th e w o rld a n d
w ag ed w a r ag ain st spousal love w hich, u p to th a t

21
trag ic m om ent, h a d b een th e glorious th em e an d
th e b ac k b o n e o f th e relatio n sh ip b etw een o u r first
p aren ts: a te n d e r affection finding its ex p ressio n in
th e m arital em brace.

22
P a PART III
■*1 From Paganism to Modern Valued:
Denigration o f Woman

T he w o rld in w h ich w e now live is a w o rld w hose

outlook is so d isto rted th a t w e absolutize w h a t is
relative (m oney-m aking, pow er, success) a n d rela-
tivize w h a t is absolu te (tru th , m oral values, a n d
G o d ).61 Pow er, riches, fam e, success, a n d dom i­
n ance are idolized; hum ility, chastity, m odesty, self-
sacrifice, a n d service are lo o k ed d o w n u p o n as
signs o f w eakness. T his last sentence, N ietzsc h e’s
p h ilo so p h y in a n u ts h e ll—th e g lo rific a tio n o f
stren g th a n d th e d enig ration o f w e a k n e ss—h as b e ­
com e th e shallow core o f m o d ern th o u g h t a n d fem ­
inist belief.
T he g rav ity o f th e ir offense w as such th a t it w as
im possible for o u r first p aren ts to reco v er th e p rice­
less gift o f su p ern atu ral life. G od alone could do so
and, in H is infinite m ercy a n d goodness, H e chose
to sen d us H is only S on to effect o u r redem ption b y
H is d eath a t C alvary. As every sin brings w ith it its

23
o w n p u n ish m en t, is it su rp risin g th a t to d a y w e
h av e beco m e so m o ra lly b lin d (fo r w ic k e d n e ss
blinds) th a t w e save b a b y w hales a t g re a t cost, an d
m u rd e r m illions o f u n b o rn ch ild re n ?62
M an 's conscience has b een so darkened b y his re ­
p e a te d infidelities to w a rd G od th a t th ese o u tra ­
geous m u rd ers are no longer reg istered as being
crim es th a t c iy to heaven. B aby m u rd erers go to
b ed w ith a good conscience and th e satisfaction o f
having b een "efficient.” B ern a rd N a th an so n , in his
grip p in g w o rk The H and o f God, relates th a t after
having p erfo rm ed an abortion he had the pleasant
feeling o f having completed a work well done and
o f having "liberated” pregnant wom en from a bur­
den hateful to them. Babies are cheap to make.
B aby w hales are m ore costly.
O u r first p a re n ts’ m inds w ere d ark en ed b y sin,
th eir wills w ere w eakened, th eir judgm ent becam e
distorted. T he h ierarchy of values being upset, male
accomplish m enu became overvalued. P h y sical strength
becam e glorified a n d w eakness w as looked dow n
u p o n as a p ro o f o f inferiority. This is written in the
book o f Wisdom, referring to the language o f the u n ­
godly: "but let our might be our law o f right, for
what is weak proves itself to be useless.”63
H o m e r’s Iliad illu strates this. T he G reek heroes
are strong, healthy, victorious. T hose w ho are con­
q u ered a n d d efeated deserve to becom e slaves; th ey
are p lainly inferior. It is n o tew o rth y th a t th e great-

24
est cu ltu res have often been defeated b y prim itive
trib es th a t h a d little o r no culture, b u t p len ty o f
p hysical d arin g a n d stam ina.64 H a n d in h a n d w ith
th e overestim ation o f stren g th a n d virility goes an
o v e re stim a tio n o f a c c o m p lish m e n ts, feats, p e r ­
form ances, success. In o u r society to b e a “self-
m ade m a n ” calls fo r aw e. A Bill G ates, an O p ra h
W infrey, o r even a Bill C linton inspire people w ith
a to tally illegitim ate feeling o f adm iration. B ut su c­
cess does n o t g u aran tee authentic greatness. M a n y
scoundrels have been incredibly successful, too suc­
cessful for th e ir ow n good. O rig in al sin blinds us to
th e fact th a t all these feats, often aided b y ru th less­
ness, craftiness, o r even plain luck, have no value in
th e light o f eternity. W e should alw ays raise the
question: Quid edt hoc ad aeternitatem? (W h a t is this
in light o f etern ity ?). In fact, it is only d u st a n d
ashes. N o one en ters th e gates o f heaven because
he is a m illionaire; no one is w o rth y to see G od b e ­
cause he is “fam ous.” Indeed, w o rld ly “w isdom ” is
sh eer foolishness. This has b een seen b y Socrates,
a n d em phatically re p eated b y S aint P aul, “fo r the
fo o lish n ess o f G o d is w ise r th a n m en, a n d th e
w eak n ess o f G od is stro n g er th a n m en .”65 A gainst
th e b ac k g ro u n d o f th e su p ern atu ral, th e in an ity o f
h u m an praise becom es evident.
A fu rth e r co n sequence o f this b ro k e n equilib­
riu m is th a t w e te n d to o verrate “creativity.” To be
successful in o u r co n tem p o rary w orld, one m u st be

25
“in v entive.” C reativity does have a positive ring,
b u t th e crucial qu estion is n o t w h e th e r a perso n is
“creativ e,” b u t ra th e r “w h a t does he c re a te ? ” To
p raise an innovative type o f arch itectu re w ith o u t
asking w h e th e r o r n o t it is beautiful is inane. To
h o n o r som eone because o f th e n u m b er o f books
a n d articles he has pu b lish ed w ith o u t investigating
w h e th e r o r n o t th ey are tru e is once again to be off­
track . T he lopsided view w hich to d a y has gained
cu rren c y inevitably leads fem inists to o verrate “cre­
ativity,” “novelty,” a n d “fashion,” changes sought
fo r th e ir ow n sake; these tickle people's curiosity
a n d d ra w them into th e v o rtex of to tal m etaphysical
instability. It is an o th er w a y o f d raw in g atten tion
aw ay from “etern al tru th s" a n d unch an g in g values.
The spirit o f th e tim e teaches us th a t to d ay every­
th in g depends u p o n w h a t is “in th e air,” w h a t people
w ant. In this spiritual clim ate, trad itio n is doom ed.
T he p ast is looked dow n upon as “d ead ,” as having
nothing to give to "m odern m an .’’® As w om en are
w eak er th a n m en, an d as th e y do n o t b ask in the
lim elight as m uch as m en do, as th ey are less “cre­
ativ e” th an th e stro ng sex, th ey are b o u n d to be the
victim s o f this d isto rted h ierarch y o f values. T h at
w om en have been victim ized b y this distortion o f
th e h ierarch y of values is deplorable a n d sad indeed;
but that feminidtd have endorsed thid Inversion id dtill more
pitiful. Im prisoned in th e spiritual jail of secular cat­
egories, th ey fail to u n d ersta n d that their true middion

26
id to dwim againdt the tide and, w ith G o d s grace, help
resto re th e p ro p e r h ierarch y o f values.

B y living up to th e ir calling, w om en w ill succeed in

g u aran teein g a p ro p e r reco g n itio n o f th e u n iq u e
value o f fem ininity a n d its crucial m ission in the
w orld. T his is p ro v e d b y innum erable testim onies.
A F ren c h w rite r b y th e nam e o f V inet w ro te th a t
“th e value o f a people is to be gau g ed b y th e value
o f its w o m e n ” (“an peaple vaut ce qae valent ded
fannied”) d 7 S tro n g m en are often cow ed b y w om en,
p artic u la rly b y th eir w ives. In his life o f G andhi,
Louis F ish er w rites, “G an d h i feared n eith er m an
n o r governm ent, n eith er prison, n o r p o v e rty n o r
d ea th . B u t he d id fe a r his w ife .”*’® In th e sam e
book, referrin g to th e conflict th a t developed b e ­
tw e e n In d ia a n d P a k ista n , h e w rite s, “M o slem
w o m en are th e real force b e h in d th e ir m en .”69 T he
fear th a t w ives can inspire in th e ir h u sb an d s is also
stressed in M ichael Scam m ell’s life o f Solzhenitsyn.
H e w rite s, “S eem in gly all-p o w e rfu l in his c o n ­
fro n tatio n w ith th e Soviet g o v e rn m e n t.. .he w as y e t
helpless w h e n faced w ith th e w ra th o f a d iscard ed
w o m an .”79 In h e r b o o k Catherine the Great, J o a n
H aslip w rites th a t “he [S tanislaus] w as at his h a p ­
piest w ith th e fem inine m em bers o f his court, for
th e w om en w ere far cleverer a n d b e tte r educated.
V isitors to P o lan d w ere alw ays im pressed b y the

27
obvious su p erio rity o f w om en and th e ir in tere st in
politics a n d th e a rts .”71 In h e r b o o k on A dolf von
H ild e b ra n d , Isolde K urz re la tes th a t th e artist's
wife, Irene, to ld h e r th a t since th e d ea th o f Fieldler,
th e friendships th a t h e r h u sb an d v alu ed m ost w ere
th o se he h a d w ith w o m en .”72 In his m em oirs, Er~
lebte Weltgeochichte, th e fam ous e d u c ato r F. W. F oer-
ster m akes th e claim th a t in F ra n c e w om en are
definitely "the stro n g sex .”73 P earl B uck w rites th a t
in C h in a “it w as tru e th a t generally speaking th e
m en w ere in ferio r to th e w om en, a n d this I suppose
w as b ec au se b o y s w e re so sp o iled in C h in ese
h o m e s ...th e C hinese w om an usually em erges the
stro n g er c h a rac te r__ ”74 She also cites th e w o rd s of
C onfucius, “W h e re th e w om an is faithful, no evil
can befall. T he w om an is the ro o t a n d th e m an th e
tree. T he tre e grow s only as hig h as th e ro o t is
s tro n g ,”75 a n d fu rth e r, “T he stro n g e st th in g on
ea rth is a w o m an __ ”76 A lbert Speer, th e personal
arch itect o f A dolf H itler, w rites in his m em oirs th a t
“in g eneral th e w ives o f th e regim e’s bigw igs resis­
te d th e tem p tatio n o f p o w e r fa r m ore th a n th eir
h u s b a n d s ...th e y looked a t the often g rotesque a n ­
tics o f th e ir h u sb an d s w ith in n er re serv atio n __ ”77
O b v io u sly th e s tre n g th th a t th e se m en n o te in
w om en refers n o t to ex terio r accom plishm ents but
to the m oral power th a t a w om an can possess.
T hese accolades indicate clearly th a t th e “w e ak ­
n ess” o f th e fem ale sex, as fa r as accom plishm ents

28
a n d pro d u ctiv ity are concerned, can be m ore th a n
com pensated b y h er m oral stren g th when dhe Lived up
to her calling. T h at is, w h en she loves. T he influence
th a t she can exercise over h e r m ale p a rtn e r is g reat
in d eed w h en it m anifests itself n o t b y issuing com ­
m ands b u t b y exam ple a n d gentle persuasion. O n
th e o th er hand, w h en she betrays h e r m ission, she
can in d eed be m an ’s dow nfall. H e r role is a k ey one.
K ierk eg aard w ro te th a t “w om an is the conscience o f
m an .”78 B ut h er conscience m ust b e illum ined b y
faith a n d enlivened b y tru e love; it m u st no t be a
conscience d isto rted b y self-centered relativism .
B ut fem in ists—blin d ed b y secu larism —do w hat,
in fact, w ill lead to a w o rsen in g o f w o m en ’s situ a­
tion. Feminidtd are women d great enemy. N o t only will
th e y n o t succeed in try in g to becom e like m en, b u t
th e y w ill also inevitably jeopardize th e sublim e m is­
sion confided to them . K ierk eg aard w rites, “I hate
all talk ab o u t th e em ancipation o f w om an. G od fo r­
b id th a t it m ay ever com e to pass. I can n o t tell y o u
w ith w h a t p ain this th o u g h t is able to pierce m y
heart, n o r w h a t passionate exasperation, w h a t hate
I feel to w a rd every one w ho gives v e n t to such talk.
It is m y com fort th a t those w ho proclaim such w is­
dom are n o t as w ise as serpents b u t are fo r th e m ost
p a rt blockheads w hose nonsense can do no h a rm —
no base sed u cer could th in k o u t a m ore dangerous
d o ctrin e for w om an, for once he has m ade h e r b e ­
lieve this she is en tirely in his pow er, a t th e m ercy

29
o f his will, she can be noth in g for him ex cep t a p re y
to his w him s, w h ereas as w om an, she can be every­
th in g for him .”79 N ietzsche perceived clearly th at
the em ancipation o f w om en is a sym ptom th a t th eir
fem inine instincts a re w eakening.80 H e stresses th a t
this “em ancipation" in fact m eans the "m asculiniza-
tio n ” o f w om en.81
T he w hole trag ed y o f co n tem p o rary feminism —
w hich C ardinal J o s e f R atzinger considers one o f
th e g re atest th re a ts m enacing the C h u rc h —stem s
from a lack of faith a n d a loss o f th e sense o f the su­
p e rn atu ral. Fem inism is inconceivable in a w o rld
ro o ted in Ju d e o -C h ristia n values. B ut it is in the
N ew T estam ent th a t the full glory o f the female
mission an d vocation shines in the person o f the
H oly Virgin o f N a zare th w ho accepted to becom e
th e m o th er of th e R edeem er w hile rem aining a v ir­
gin (as pro p h esied by Isaiah). O n ce spiritual eye­
sight, severely disto rted by original sin, has been
co rrected b y th e lenses o f faith, w e are in a position
to u n d e rsta n d G o d ’s creation as H e m ean t it to be
a n d to reject w ith h o rro r the view offered b y the
deform ing lenses o f secularism .
Y et w e live in a w o rld so deeply steeped in secu­
larism th a t m any o f us are n o t even aw are th a t w e
are influenced by its disastrous ideology. T here are
som e d ev o u t and faithful C h ristian s w ho w ould be
offended if accused o f being tain ted by the spirit o f
the tim e (o r Z eitgeist), b u t nevertheless —in certain

50
co ncrete situ a tio n s—th e ir attitu d e b etray s th a t the
fum es o f secularism have p e n e tra te d into th e ir sp ir­
itu al lungs and, rising to th e ir brains, have colored
th e ir judgm ent. It is only b y b eing aw are o f the
d a n g e r o f th e Zeitgeist, a n d daily p u rg in g ourselves
o f its d isastrous influence, th a t w e can hope to be
freed from its subtle poison. In his Memoird, m y
h u sb a n d re p eated ly un derlines th e fact th a t m any
faithful, sincere C atholics w ere infected b y th e po i­
son o f N azism w ith o u t being aw are o f it.
O n e f u r th e r d e p lo ra b le c o n se q u e n c e o f th is
secularistic view is th e claim th a t “service is d e ­
g ra d in g .”^2 It is view ed as antidem ocratic. It is h u ­
m iliating. H u m ility is a v irtu e th a t finds little favor
in th e secularistic w orld. It is only p uzzled a n d co n ­
fu sed b y th e w o rd s o f Psalm 118:71: “it is good for
m e th a t I w as h u m b led th a t I m ig h t le a rn y o u r
statu tes.” O n ce again, this e rro r inevitably leads to
a d en ig ratio n o f w om en w hose m ission traditionally
h a s b ee n to serv e — follow ing th e re b y o u r L o rd
w h o said, “I h ave n o t com e to be served b u t to
s e r v e . H o w ca n a n y o n e m e d ita tin g on th e se
w o rd s com e to th e conclusion th a t to serve, w hich
is a form o f love, is degrading? T he m ost glorious
title o f th e H o ly F a th e r w as in tro d u ce d b y G re g o iy
V II w h o called him dervud dervorum Dei (the serv an t
o f th e servants o f G od), for au th o rity is given to the
pope, n o t for his personal advantage, b u t fo r the
benefit o f those confided to his care. W oe to the

31
p o n tiff w h o abuses this a u th o rity a n d basks in the
p o w e r given him . W oe to him w hose am bition has
been th e leitmotiv of his ascension to th e pontifical
th ro n e. T hose w o rth y o f this h o n o r are those w ho
do n o t seek it, do n o t even desire it.8"* W h a t ch a rac­
terizes holiness is th is lim itless readiness to serve
o th e rs. In his b o o k S a in t Bernard, R a tisb o n n e
w rites, “th e hum ble B ern ard , rem ained inflexibly
on th e low est step; n o r w o u ld he ever exchange for
an y w o rld ly ad v antage th e privilege o f being the
serv an t o f th e least o f his b re th re n .”85
T he n ew age philosophy o f fem inism , in w aging
w a r on fem ininity, is in fact w aging w a r on C hris­
tianity. F o r in th e divine p lan b o th are intim ately
linked. N o t socialism, as Sim one de B eauvoir b e ­
lieved, b u t C h rist is th e g re at ally o f w om en. M o d ­
e rn id eo lo g y w a g es w a r o n th e G o sp el w h ic h
teaches hum ility a n d th a t those w ho low er th em ­
selves will be exalted. Indeed, th e re can be no rec­
o n ciliatio n b e tw e e n a n id eo lo g y th a t ad v o c ates
p o w e r a n d success a n d the one w hose core dem on­
strates th a t th e w a y to G od is th e hum ble accep t­
an ce o f o n e ’s helplessness: “C om e to m y aid, O
L ord, h asten to help m e.” B oth th e O ld a n d th e
N e w T estam ents condem n pride, arrogance, self-
assurance, an d the stu p id ity o f th o se w h o believe
th a t th e y do n o t n eed G od. T he cry o f every C h ris­
tian , ec h o in g S a in t P e te r sin k in g in th e sea o f
Galilee, is “H elp me, O L ord, lest I p e rish .”

32
 C hristianity teaches th a t exterior feats (the inven­
tion o f com puters, o f the atom ic bom b, o r landing on
th e m oon) are d u st an d ashes in G o d ’s sight. W e
shall be ju d g ed n o t according to o u r “perform ance”
in th e secular w orld, b u t according to o u r hum ility
a n d charity. It is wise to rem em ber th a t the w orld
w ill perish b y fire w hich will destroy all things.®^ It
is quite conceivable th a t the m ind-boggling tech n o ­
logical p rogress o f the last sixty years, if severed
from w isdom , will bring about m an ’s dow nfall. Plato
w ro te centuries ago, in the first book o f The Lawd,
th a t m an is his ow n w o rst enemy. It w as tru e then; it
is tru e today. M an can now destroy the w o rld b y his
ow n m ere “fiat”—his diabolical caricature o f G o d ’s
creation. O n e th in g is certain: W h en the tim e has
come, nothing w hich is m an-m ade will subsist. O ne
day, all hum an accom plishm ents will be red u ced to a
pile o f ashes. B u t ev ery single child to w h o m a
w om an has given b irth will live forever, for he has
been given an im m ortal soul m ade to G o d ’s image
an d likeness. In this light, the assertion o f de B eau­
voir th a t “w om en p roduce nothing” becom es p artic­
ularly ludicrous.

33
 PART IV
Woman: Tide Privileged Sex

As m en tio n ed above, fem inists re sen t th e fact th a t

sev eral g re a t C h ristia n th in k e rs, b eg in n in g w ith
S ain t Peter, have re ferred to w om en as being “the
w e a k e r sex .”88 S everal F ath ers o f th e C h u rch fol­
low ed suit. O b v iously these pillars o f C hristianity
have som ething valid in m ind. It w o u ld be unw ise
on o u r p a rt to discard it o u trig h t as an expression
o f “m ale chauvinism .”
W h a t can be m ean t b y "w eaker?" A n obvious
an sw e r w o u ld be th a t the “fair sex ” is physically
w e a k e r th a n its m ale c o u n te rp a rt. T his is som e­
th in g so obvious th a t w e can ignore this ex p lan a­
tio n as irrelev an t. M oreover, th e re w o u ld be no
reaso n for th e m ost “sensitive” fem inist to be of­
fen d ed for it is an un deniable fact. B ut th e fem inists
are offended becau se th e y assum e th a t “w e a k e r”
m eans less intelligent, less talented, less reliable,
less m oral, etc. As w e saw, num erous m ale sayings
su p p o rt th is thesis. It is tru e th a t the w o rd “w e a k ”

55
is often u sed to re fe r to things, actions, o r attitu d es
w h ich are flaw ed. O n e speaks o f a “w e ak a rg u ­
m e n t,” a “w eak d efense,” a “w eak ch a rac te r,” "w eak
h ea lth ,” a “w e ak p erfo rm an ce.” In all these cases,
w eakness refers to som ething defective a n d u n satis­
factory. As w e saw, G reek lite ratu re (I am th in k in g
o f H o m e r) g lo rified stre n g th , acco m p lish m en t,
cou rag e, a n d pow er. T he w e ak one is defeated,
flouted, a n d ridiculed. O u r co n tem p o rary idoliza­
tion of sp orts stem s from the sam e root. H e w ho
w ins is a hero; th is is how P resid en t B ush qualified
th e A m erican s w h o w o n a go ld m edal a t th e
O lym pic gam es in Seoul! H e w h o is defeated is a
w eakling. T he B elgian football team d efeated in
P aris in J u n e 1998 w as a case in point. H ecklers
g reeted th em w h en th e y re tu rn e d to B russels.

CONS A N D PROS OF WEAKNESS

Cons
"W eak” can re fer to w h a t is fragile, delicate, b re a k ­
able, vulnerable, sensitive. W om en are m ore v u l­
nerable than men and this vulnerability can render
them helpless and irritable. They are usually less
capable than men to fend for them selves. H ow
often the Bible reminds us o f the duty to care for
widows. W idowers are not mentioned.
T h at w om en are in this sense w e a k e r th a n m en is
exem plified b y fem ale tears. If all th e tears shed b y

36
w o m en h a d b een collected since th e begin n in g o f
th e w orld, th e y w ou ld com pete w ith th e sea. T he
te a rs shed b y m en m ight fill a p o n d o f m odest size.
N o t only do th e y c iy m uch m ore th a n m en, b u t
m o reo v er, th e y a re n o t ash a m e d o f th e ir te a rs,
w h e reas th ere are m en w h o w o u ld ra th e r die th a n
be tearful. M o re w ill be said ab o u t this later.
Because o f “the m eld o f h ea rt a n d m ind" w hich
characterizes w om en,® th ey are m ore likely to be
w o u n d e d th a n m en, w h o se p o w e r o f a b stra ctio n
often shields them from negative feelings. W om en
have m uch less control over th e ir em otions; th ey
usually have greater sensitivity, th ey are m ore in tu ­
itive. T heir bodies are m irrors o f th eir psyche an d
seem to be m ore closely connected th a n in m en. This
innate tr a it—w h en n o t pro p erly g u id e d —m ay lead
them to yield to seduction a n d to some serious m oral
w eaknesses, for example, partisanship, subjectivism
in judging situations a n d persons. M ore th a n men,
w om en are likely to be attra cted b y m a g i c . T h i s
m ay tak e th e form o f spiritism, ta ro t cards, o r O uija
boards. F ortune-tellers are often w om en.
T his m ig h t b e a n o th e r p o in t S a in t P e te r a n d
S a in t A u g u stin e h a d in m in d w h e n th e y called
w om en “th e w e ak er sex.” W om en tak e th e ir feel­
ings m uch m ore seriously th a n m en do, a n d so th ey
have a ten d en cy to dw ell u p o n them a n d fall into
self-centeredness. T hey are m ore likely th a n m en to
b e ro m a n tic a n d sen tim e n ta l (let us th in k o f

37
M ad am e B ovary), to becom e p re y to an u n h ea lth y
e x a lta tio n , to esc ap e in to th e w o rld o f th e ir
dream s, and to be d om inated by th e ir im agination
an d th eir fancy. T h ro u g h o u t h e r au to b io g rap h y ,
S ain t T eresa o f Avila repeatedly refers to th e d a n ­
g ers m enacing the sp iritu al life o f "the w e ak sex ”:
em otionalism , d ream in g , illusions, se lf-c e n te re d ­
ness. S he rep eated ly stresses how m uch th ey are in
need o f g u id an ce. Two g re a t sp iritu al d irec to rs.
Saint F rancis o f Sales and D om C olom ba M arm ion,
em phasize th e fact th a t "how ever intellectual o r
en lig h ten ed a w o m an m ay be, G od, according to
th e o rd in a iy rulin gs o f H is providence, w ills h e r to
b e d irected b y a m an w ho is H is m inister.”91 This
is a them e w hich keeps re c u rrin g in his spiritual
letters. W om en need m en w hose m ission is to help
them to ch annel th e ir em otions, to distinguish be­
tween those, that are valid and those th a t are tainted by ir­
rationality, th o se w h ich a re legitim ate a n d those
w hich are illegitim ate.
B u t S ain t T e re sa —echoing S aint P e te r A lcan­
t a r a —also w rites th a t m ore w om en th a n m en re ­
ceive e x tra o rd in a ry graces, th a t th e y a re m o re
receptive to G o d s voice a n d p artic u la rly capable of
heroic don atio n w h e n th e ir h e a rt is p urified.92 T he
m ore privileged they are, the m ore th ey need g u id ­
ance. S aint Teresa had the w isdom o f alw ays tu rn ­
ing to w ise a n d holy spiritual d irecto rs to help h er
discern the validity o f h er m ystical experiences.

38
 W ith o u t such g uidance o r grace w o m an m ay be
w e ak en ough to m isuse one o f h e r g re a t gifts, h er
beauty, to h e r ow n d estru ctio n a n d th a t o f others.
T h e p ro stitu te (the m ost trag ic o f w om en) has m as­
te re d th e sad a rt o f seduction. S he know s w h ich
b u tto n s to p ress to catch a client. Since original sin,
lu st has en tered into th e h u m an h e a rt and, unless a
p erso n is p ro tec ted b y grace a n d a faithful life o f
prayer, it is, alas, tru e th a t m ost h u m an beings w ill
fall into th e n ets o f coarse sexual attractio n . W h a t
is so trag ic ab o u t this is th a t th e b e a u ty o f th e d i­
vine p lan for th e relations b etw een m en a n d w om en
is th e re b y tram p led u p o n a n d b ad ly stained. It is
ind eed a sham eful th in g to use a n d abuse a n o th er
h u m an being. M oreover, sexual sins disgrace m an's
soul in a w a y th a t can n o t be u n d e rsto o d w h e n o u r
conception o f this m ysterious sphere is p u re ly bio­
logical. O n th e o th er hand, it is inconceivable for
anyone to fall into sexual d ep rav ity (a n o th e r w o rd
for filth) if he rem ains aw are th a t G od sees him at
all tim es. T h ere are deeds th a t can only be accom ­
plish ed in darkness.
T he m aster psychologist D o stoevsky has p o w e r­
fully dep icted in The Brothers Karamazov h o w an u n ­
fo rtu n a te w om an called G ru c h e n k a play ed on the
k ey b o a rd o f h e r sexual attra ctio n in o rd e r to b rin g
p o o r D m itri into h e r nets. It is a typical cat-and-
m ouse gam e. L iteratu re ab o u n d s w ith such exam ­
ples, a n d one can n o t help b u t feel s o riy fo r the

39
foolishness o f th e “stro n g se x ” (as illu stra te d in
Gogol's pow erful novel TaraJ Bulba).
B u t it is n o t only w om en w ho can seduce m en.
M en can also seduce w om en. A nd even th o u g h gen­
eralizatio n is risky, w e a re te m p te d to say th a t
w o m en are u su ally b ro u g h t to th e ir fall, n o t so
m uch because o f lust, b u t because o f the prom ise o f
eternal love, o r because th ey are told th a t th eir lover
will kill him self if she does no t yield to his w ishes, or
because o f sh eer vanity, o r because th e y desperately
w a n t “to be w a n te d ” a n d p ro tected . H o w sw eet it is
to hear, “I have n ever seen a w om an as beautiful as
y o u a r e .” “Y ou are th e on ly one w h o h as ever
to u ch ed m y h e a rt.” T he d ra m a o f F a u st a n d M ar-
garete com es to m ind. It is so terrib ly tragic th a t
w h e n M a rg a re te fin d s h e rs e lf p re g n a n t, a b a n ­
doned, a n d in a d esperate situation, she u tte rs the
w o rd s: “it w as so good; it w as so b ea u tifu l.”93 She
n u rtu re d th e illusion th a t th e “g re a t” m an w h o con­
q u ered h e r actu ally loved h er and, w h en h e r eyes
opened, she w as th re a te n e d b y despair.
F inally, m ore th a n m en, w o m en sp ea k ab o u t
th e ir aches a n d pains. W h e n sick, m en m ay g ru m ­
b le b u t d islik e m a k in g o f th e ir d isc o m fo rt th e
topic o f co n v ersation. U sually w om en g rieve m ore
th an m en a n d w o rry a b o u t possible d a n g e rs b e ­
fore th ey becom e actu al. If th e y y ield to this te n ­
dency, th e ir b eh a v io r can easily becom e irratio n al.
W o m en are m o re likely th a n m en to p an ic w h e n

40
th e y face a p ra c tic a l p roblem . T he la tte r feel ch a l­
len g ed a n d o ften enjoy tack lin g tech n o lo g ical d if­
ficulties; th e y w a n t to fin d solutions to problem s.
M e n u su ally refu se to th in k a b o u t p ro b lem s u n til
th e y ac tu ally ta k e place a n d they can do something
about them. T h ey sh u n ta lk in g a b o u t th in g s w h ich
th e y c a n n o t ch a n g e o r in flu en ce. O n th e o th e r
h an d , w o m e n —m o re th a n m e n —g ra sp in tu itiv ely
th e m ean in g a n d v alue o f suffering. C h e ste rto n
claim s th a t m en are m ore p leasu re-se ek in g th a n
w om en. A frie n d o f m y h u sb a n d w ho, fo r m an y
y e a rs, w as ch ap lain fo r b o th m onks a n d n uns, to ld
h im th a t th e la tte r w e re m u ch m o re w illin g to
m ake sacrifices o v er a n d above w h a t w as strictly
co m m an d ed b y th e rule.

In all this, no intelligent w om an can find g ro u n d for

offense. As a m atter o f fact, to be rem inded o f o n e’s
w eakness is, from a su pernatural point o f view, a
grace. H o w m any m istakes could w e all have avoided
if w e h ad rem inded ourselves th a t w ith o u t G od’s help
w e can do noth in g ? H o w m an y b lu n d e rs do w e
m ake because w e act im pulsively an d overlook our
w eaknesses an d lim itations? H o w m any sins, faults,
m istakes, an d stupidities can be traced b ack to the
fact th a t th eir p erp etrato r did no t realize (or did not
w an t to realize) how w eak he w as a n d did n o t ask for
advice? Instead o f being offended w hen rem inded of

41
th eir w eakness, supernaturally m otivated w om en are
grateful. To be conscious o f o n e’s w eakness an d to
tru st in G o d s help is the w ay to authentic strength
an d victory. This has been etched adm irably b y Saint
Paul w hen he w rote: “It is w hen I am w eak th a t I am
strong.”94 In the liturgy dedicated to S aint A gnes—a
y o u n g m aid w ho suffered m artyrdom —the C hurch
w rites: “O G od w ho chooses w h a t is feeble in the
w o rld ” ("qui Lnfirma m undi eiig 'u).. . ”). A few days after
the feast of Saint Agnes, the C hurch celebrates an ­
o th er y o u n g female saint: D orothy, virgin an d m ar­
tyr. D o m G u e ra n g e r com m ents, “T he religion of
C hrist alone can produce in tim id wom en, like the
saint of today, an energy w hich at times surpasses
th at o f th e m ost valiant m artyrs am ong m en. Thus
does our L o rd glorify H is infinite power, b y crushing
S a ta n ’s h ead w ith w h a t is b y n a tu re so w e a k .”9^
O nce again, th e key to th eir victory over th eir innate
“w eakness” is the supernatural.

Pros
I f faults o ccu r because o f w o m an ’s w eakness, in so
many cases, far from being a negative characteris­
tic, the weak, the fragile, the breakable, the vulner­
able, the sensitive refers to objects or persons who
have something particularly fine about them, and
which, for this reason, are more easily wounded or
destroyed. A set o f Sevres porcelain is to be deli-

42
c a te ly h a n d le d , w h e re a s a p o t o f iro n c a n b e
ru d e ly tre a te d w ith o u t h arm . E v en th o u g h S ain t
P e te r does n o t elab o rate, w e can assum e th a t this
w as one o f th e m eanings he h a d in m in d w h e n he
w ro te o f w o m e n ’s w eak n ess (i.e., w o m en sh o u ld
b e h o n o re d b ecau se o f th e ir fra ilty ). In M ed iaev al
E u ro p e , it w as th e g lo ry o f th e tro u b a d o u rs to
p r o te c t w o m en , a n d to c h a lle n g e a n y o n e w h o
failed to re sp e c t them . To kill defenseless w om en
a n d ch ild re n in th e co u rse o f hostilities w as tra d i­
tionally considered ignoble. D o n Q u ix o te’s m ission
w as to resp ect, honor, a n d d e fen d th e “w e a k ,” a n d
p a rtic u la rly w om en.
M oreover, th e v ery frailty o f w om en can tu rn out
to be th eir strength. T h eir w eakness appeals to pity;
it can to u ch m en ’s h earts a n d appeal to w h a t is b est
in them , nam ely th e ir chivalrous in stin ct to help
those w eak er th a n them selves. As m entioned above,
th ere is an u n w ritte n law th a t w as re sp ected (at
least officially) u n til m odern w arfare to o k over: In
em ergencies, w om en a n d children w ere saved first.
T h ey w ere th e first to go into lifeboats; th e y w ere
the first to receive m edical help. In daily life, it is
ra re in deed th a t a m an tu rn s dow n a w o m an ’s cry
for help. M en ap p reciate being called upon, being
given a chance to show th eir m anliness, to play the
role o f a m ediaeval k night w hose glory w as to p ro ­
tect th e w eak a n d even to engage in daring deeds to
dazzle a n d co n q u er the beautiful lady o f his love.96

43
It is tru e in d eed th a t w om en can shed “alligator
te a rs ,” th e silly tears o f self-pity, o f self-cen tered ­
ness, tears th a t re sp o n d to im ag in ary offenses, to
w o u n d e d vanity. (Som e m en to o can fall into th is
w e ak n ess!) B u t th e fact th a t som e tears are silly
a n d illegitim ate should n o t blind us to th e fact th a t
tears can be expressions o f w h a t is b est a n d n o ­
b le st in m an . W h e n A u g u stin e, c o n q u e re d b y
grace, d ecid ed to re sp o n d to G o d ’s call to change
his life, he w as n o t asham ed to sob. “T he floods
burst from my eyes, an accep tab le sacrifice to
y o u ."97 N ot only did he cry, but he made a point o f
informing us that his “defeat” found its expression
in tears o f repentance.
T he C h u rch in h er m otherly w isdom offers h er
ch ildren a p ra y e r fo r every need; she has one sp e­
cial one for th e gift o f tears: educ de cordu) no<>tri duri-
tia Lacrymad compunctions (d raw from o u r h ard en ed
h e a rt tears of com punction). A deep conversion is
usually "b ap tized ” in tears.
Granted that wom en c iy easily, the question is
"why do they cry?” This w hole question edges on
whether tears are legitimate or illegitimate. We live
in a world in w hich tears are called for daily. King
David wrote, “M y eyes shed tears, because men do
n o t k ee p th y law .”98 O n e o f th e b e a titu d e s is
“B lessed are those th a t m o u rn .” W oe to those w ho

44
do n o t c iy w h e n G od is blasphem ed, w h e re odious
p ain tin g s are ex h ib ited a n d p ra ise d as “w o rk s of
a r t,” w h e n som e p riests say sacrilegious m asses,
w h e n ch ildren are daily abused, w h e n people are
to rtu re d , w h e n millions are starving. Tears are the
p ro p e r response to brutality, injustice, cruelty, b las­
phem y, h atre d . C h rist w e p t w h e n H e saw J e r u ­
salem, a n d w h e n H e cam e to L az aru s’s tom b. S aint
F ran cis o f Assisi shed tears because “love w as too
little lo ved.” As Virgil p u t it: “S u n t lacrimae rerum ”
(“th ese are tearfu l th in g s,” th a t is, situations th a t
call for te a rs ). "
C h rist prom ises th a t in h eaven all tears w ill be
d ried, a n d K ierk eg aard com m ents ab o u t th e sad
condition o f th o se w ho have nev er shed a tear. W e
should cry o v er th e daily offenses to G od, cry over
o u r sins, cry o v er th e in g ratitu d e o f m an. T he m ost
h oly o f all w om en, M ary, is called th e m ater doloroda
(so rro w fu l m other). H e r im m ense so rro w has b een
ad m irab ly ex p ressed b y G iacopone d a Todi, in his
sublim e poem d ed icated to th e so rro w s o f C h rist’s
m o th e r.100 “Is th e re one w h o w o u ld n o t w eep ,
w h elm ’d in m iseries so deep C h rist’s d e a r m o th er
b eh o ld .” A w o m an ’s w a y to holiness is clearly to
p u rify h e r G od-given sensitivity a n d to d irec t it
into th e p ro p e r channels. S he sh o u ld fight against
m au d lin te a rs a n d p ra y fo r holy t e a r s —te a rs of
love, o f g ratitu d e, o f co ntrition.

45
W e h av e said th a t w o m en are m ore a ttu n e d to
th e ir em otions th an m en, a n d th a t this can lead to
serious faults. T h ere are cases in w h ich th e h e a rt is
w ro n g (h y p e rtro p h y o f the h e a rt).101 A w o m a n ’s
h e a rt can d eg e n e ra te into a v irg in fo rest w h ich
calls for p ru n in g . N evertheless, th e re are situations
w h e n th e h e a rt is rig h t a n d “re a s o n ” has becom e
derailed, fallen into cheap rationalism c h a ra c te r­
ized b y th e stu b b o rn refu sal to ad m it th a t m any
g re a t tru th s tra n sc e n d reason. R ationalism is aller­
gic to “m y steries.” P ascal m u st have h ad th is in
m in d w h e n he w ro te, “T he h e a rt has its reasons
th a t reaso n does n o t k n o w of,”102 an d “T he last
p ro ceed ing o f reaso n is to recognize th a t th ere is
an infinity o f things w h ich are b eyond it.”103 F i­
nally, “T h ere is n o th in g so conform able to reason
as th is disavow al o f re a so n .”104
W om en, too, have a m ission to w ard th e o th er
sex: th e one o f aw akening a n d refining m a n ’s affec-
tivity, often atro p h ie d by abstractionism . T hey are
definitely called u p o n to “hum anize him .” In his
m atchless, hu m orous way, C h esterto n speaks ab o u t
“fem inine dignity against m asculine row diness.’’105
A m an ’s h e a rt can be a d ese rt desp erately in n eed of
w ater. W e all k n ow m en w ho are “th in k in g m a­
chines" a n d are dehum anized. T he hum orous and,
a t tim es, m erciless K ie rk e g a a rd n e v e r m issed a

46
ch an ce o f m ak in g a th ru s t a t his d ead ly enemy,
H egel. H e hints at th e fact th a t H e g el’s “m arriage
m u st th e re fo re h av e b ee n as im p e rso n a l as his
th o u g h t." 106 H e clearly w ishes us to feel so rry for
M rs. H egel!
H o w beau tifu l is th e com plem entariness o f m en
a n d w om en according to th e D ivine Plan. It is not
b y accident th a t S ain t F rancis o f Assisi w as b est
u n d ersto o d b y S ain t Clare; S aint F rancis o f Sales
b y S ain t J e a n n e F rangoise de C hantal; S aint V in­
cen t o f P au l b y Louise de M arillac. In o u r ow n
tim es, M arie P ila w as c o -lo u n d ress w ith F a th e r
E u g e n e M a rie o f N o tre D a m e d e Vie in th e
P ro v en ce. M a n is m ade for com m union a n d th e
m ost p erfect form o f com m union calls for persons
w h o com plem ent each other. This is w h y G od said:
"it is n o t good fo r m an to be alone."
Fem ale in terests are ce n te red on th e h u m an side
o f th e ir lives: th eir fam ily life, th e ir relatio n sh ip s to
th o se th e y love, th e ir co n cern ab o u t th e ir health,
th e ir w elfare and, if th e y are C hristians, th e sp iri­
tu a l w e lfa re o f th e ir c h ild re n ’s souls; in o th e r
w ords, ab o u t h u m an concerns. M o st m en sp eak
a b o u t th e sto ck m arket, politics, a n d sports; some
sp ea k a b o u t in te lle c tu a l a n d a rtistic q u e stio n s.
C h e s te rto n w as rig h t w h e n h e w ro te , "W om en
sp eak to each other; m en sp eak to th e subject th ey
are sp eak in g a b o u t.’’107

47
A w o m a n ’s m ission is m u ch a id ed b y th e v e ry
b ea u ty w hich, as w e have seen, she can use fo r h er
ow n dow nfall. A w o m an ’s loveliness (w ith all its
delicacy) can exercise such a charm u p o n h e r m ale
co u n te rp a rt th a t h er v ery frailty brings him to his
knees. T his tru th is p o ignantly highlighted in the
O ld T estam ent w h en th e lovely Q u een E sther, in
o rd e r to save h e r people w ho w ere th rea ten ed b y
th e vicio u sn ess o f th e k in g ’s m inister, d a rin g ly
bro k e th e rule p ro h ib itin g anyone from com ing to
K ing A hasuerus w ith o u t perm ission. U p o n seeing
h e r e n te rin g in to his a p a rtm e n t, “he (the k in g )
looked on her, blazing w ith anger. ” T he q u een sank
dow n. She grew faint, a n d the color d rain ed from
h e r face, a n d she leaned h e r h ead against the m aid
w h o a c co m p an ied her. “B u t G o d c h a n g e d th e
k in g ’s heart, ind ucing a m ilder spirit. H e sprang
from his th ro n e in alarm a n d to o k h e r in his arm s
u n til she recovered, com forting h e r w ith soothing
w o rd s . . . ‘W h a t is th e m atter, E s th e r? ’ H e said, 'I
am y o u r b rother. Take heart; y o u will n o t die; o u r
o rd e r only applies to o rd in ary people. C om e to m e.’
A n d raisin g his golden scep ter he laid it on h er
neck, em b raced h e r a n d said, 'sp e a k to m e.’”10®
T h an k s to G o d ’s help, h e r w eak n ess co n q u ered .
H e r v ery frailly w as th e tru m p w hich m ade h er vic­
torious. She invited the king to a feast in th e course

48
o f w h ich she beg g ed him to save h e r life a n d the
lives o f h e r people. She disclosed to h e r h u sb an d
th e plan s th a t his m inister H am an h a d devised to
ex term in ate th e Je w s. W e all k n o w th e en d o f the
story: T he w ick ed H am an died on th e v ery gallow s
he h a d set u p for them .
T hough different, a m oving p arallel—em phasiz­
in g beauty, frailty, a n d th e p o w e r o f tears all at
o n c e —is to be found in the life o f S aint Scholastica,
th e sister o f S aint Benedict, the F ath er of W estern
m onasticism . L et us recall the touching episode of
th e last visit th a t S aint B enedict h ad w ith his holy
sister. A ccording to th e rule, th ey could see each
o th er only once a year. T heir joy w as to talk ab o u t
G od an d sing H is praise together. She begged h er
b ro th e r to prolong this holy colloquy, b u t he sternly
refused: th e rule ordered him to spend the night in
his m onastery. H is gentle siste r sta rte d pray in g ,
shielding w ith h er hands the flood o f tears stream ing
from h er eyes. T he sky w hich h ad been radiantly
serene, suddenly becam e d a rk a n d threatening, and
a fierce d o w n p o u r accom panied b y lightning an d
th u n d e r fo rced S ain t B enedict to rem ain for the
night. This episode is related b y S aint G regory, an d
the L iturgy concludes this m oving scene b y stating,
“phid potuit, quia pUu) arnavit” (“having the stronger
love, she h ad the stronger p o w e r1') .109 This gentle
virgin w ept: b u t these tears w ere blessed tears, tears
o f tenderness, tears o f love, tears th a t m oved the

49
h e a rt of C h ris t—-fond arderu cardatis —to o rd e r the
heavens to produce a storm of such violence th at
S aint B enedict w as forced to concede defeat. The
strong one h ad to yield because G od w as on the side
o f the frail one.
G od has in d eed created w om en to be beautiful
(“the sons o f G od saw th a t the dau g h ters o f m en
w e re f a i r ..." ) .110 T h e ir ch arm , lovableness, a n d
b eau ty exercise a pow erful attra ctio n on the m ale
sex, a n d it should be so. It is n o tew o rth y th a t fem i­
n in e lov elin ess c o n tra d ic ts th e biological n orm :
U sually th e male anim al is m ore beautiful th a n the
female one. T he lion is m ore beautiful th a n the lion­
ess; th e ro o ster is m ore beautiful th a n th e hen; the
m ale d u ck has b rilliant colors w hich are denied its
female p artn er. This is one feature, among many,
w h ich p o in ts to th e fact that sexuality in animals
a n d h u m an beings is radically different. For no one
(ex cep t S ch o p en h a u er) w o u ld d en y th a t w om en
are o r can be beautiful. It is no t b y accid en t th a t
th ey are called “th e fair sex.”
In n o c en t little girls can have a sw eetness a n d
charm th a t m ost fath ers ca n n o t resist. I k n o w som e
w h o can be v e ry stern to w a rd th e ir sons, b u t c a n ­
not bring them selves to deny the requests o f their
little girls w ho do not know as y e t how lovely they
are. With age (especially after puberty) most girls
becom e conscious o f the power they can exercise
o v er m en. T hose w hose h ea rts are noble o r have

50
b ee n p u rified b y g race w ill n ev e r use th e ir charm
to p lay w ith th e stro n g sex, o r w o rse to “sed u c e” it
to gain th e ir ow n subjective ends. T h ey w ill p u t
th e ir gift a t th e service o f th e good a n d n o t a t th e
service o f evil. T his w as th e case w ith E sther. S he
w a s n o t se e k in g a n y p e rs o n a l a d v a n ta g e . S he
w a n te d to save h e r people, a n d she accep ted th e
ris k o f b ein g sacrificed in o rd e r to achieve th is
noble end. S he d id n o t in te n d th e d e a th o f H a m a n
(e v en th o u g h he w as, in fact, e x e c u te d ); she
w a n te d to lib erate h e r people.
W e all k n o w th a t th ere are w om en w ho, co n ­
scious o f th e p o w e r th a t the fem ale sex has over
m en, do n o t h esitate to use it in o rd e r to achieve
th e ir ow n selfish ends. W h e n a m an com m its fo rn i­
cation o r adulteiy, w e say “he w e n t to his m istress.”
C learly th e w o rd “m istre ss” in d icates w h o is in
com m and. T he p o w e r th a t w om en can w ield over
m en is g re at indeed. If th e y p u rsu e th e ir ow n self­
ish aims, w om en are S a ta n ’s slaves. I f th e y p u t th eir
charm at G o d ’s service, th e y are God’d great allied.
H o w often have I h ea rd m en say, “I t is m y wife
w h o b ro u g h t me b ack to G o d .” “It is, above all, by
m eans o f w o m an th a t p iety is first aw ak en ed a n d
sp re a d s its m y sterio u s in flu en ce o v er so ciety __
w o m an is one o f th e g ra n d in stru m en ts o f w hich
P ro v id en ce m akes use to p re p a re the w a y for civi­
lization ... sh ould she prove false to h e r high m is­
sion, society w o u ld p e rish .”111

51
 “In th e w hole evangelical h isto ry ,” says M . D e
M aistre, “w om en p lay a v ery rem ark ab le part; an d
in all th e celeb rated conquests m ade b y C h ristia n ­
ity, eith er over individuals o r over nations, th ere
has alw ays b een som e w o m an ’s influence. ”112

52
 PART V
The Transfiguration o f Weakness:
The Incarnation

T his m ystery is so g re at th a t no h u m an m ind can

ex h au st it. N o t only does it illum ine th e greatness
o f G o d ’s love for H is creatures, n o t only does it
give to m atter a dignity w h ich is a radical condem ­
n atio n o f gnosticism in all its form s, b u t it gives to
w o m an an u n h e a rd -o f dignity. K ierk eg aard rightly
re m a rk ed th a t a hum ble la b o re r w o u ld n ev e r im ag­
ine th a t a m ighty em p ero r k n ew o f his existence.113
A n d let us im agine th a t th e m ighty em p ero r no t
only k n ew o f his existence, b u t w as w illing to die in
o rd e r to redeem him . This is som ething th a t could
n ev er have en tered a m an ’s head. C hristianity is true
because it id above human invention. P oets a n d w riters
have expressed m a n ’s longing to ascen d higher. B u t
no one, absolutely no one, eith er in th e E astern or
in th e W estern w orld, has ever conceived o f the
th o u g h t th a t an infinitely p erfec t G od, th e second
p erso n o f th e H o ly Trinity, w o u ld choose to assum e

53
m an's im p erfect n atu re , to be b o rn o f a w o m an
(th ereb y giving to th e fem ale sex an u n h e a rd -o f
dignity), to k now hunger, thirst, fatigue, suffering,
an d to experience the m ost brutal, th e m ost terrib le
form o f d eath out o f love for sinful creatures. This
can only be explained b y "divine m adness.” C hrist,
the alm ighty a n d all-pow erful one, chode to become
weak, to te a c h m en hum ility. F o r H e sh a re d all
h u m an traits except sin. H is teaching aim s at op en ­
ing m en ’s m inds an d h earts to th e fact th a t th eir
“s tre n g th ” is m ere illusion, “F o r w ith o u t M e, y o u
can do nothing. ” H e told us th a t “unless w e becom e
like little ch ild ren ” w e shall n o t e n ter into th e kin g ­
dom o f G od. T he child becom es the m odel w e are
invited to follow: his w eakness, his helplessness, his
total d ep en d en ce upon others, his fragility. W h a t a
lesson for th e p ro u d P harisees w ho relied heavily
u p o n th e ir learnin g and "perfection.”
S aint P au l sheds fu rth e r light u p o n this them e in
his epistles. Both in C orinthians I a n d II he praises
"w eakness.” H e w rites, "H as n o t G od m ade foolish
th e w isdom o f the w orld? T he w eakness o f G od is
stro n g er th a n m en.”114 A nd in his second epistle,
the g reat apostle develops the sam e them e: “If I
m ust boast, I w ill bo ast o f the things th a t show m y
w eak n ess.”115 A fter having h in ted at the am azing
graces th a t he has received, he adds: “...b u t on m y
ow n behalf, I will not bo ast except o f m y w e a k ­
nesses.”115 In view o f this praise o f w eakness, how

54
can w om en be offended w h e n th ey are called "the
w e a k e r se x ? ”
T he sam e praise o f “w eak n ess” is to be found in
th e w ork s o f S ain t A ugustine. H e tells us th a t his
beloved friend Alypius, w ho h ad sw orn nev er again
to look at the cruel gam es o f the R om an gladiators,
relied too m uch u pon his ow n strength, a n d once,
w h en his friends dragged him into the gam es, he
sw ore to him self th a t he w ould keep his eyes closed.
B u t w h e n th e cro w d su d d e n ly s ta rte d sh o u tin g
from excitem ent, he could n o t help b u t open his
e y e s .117 It w as on ly w h e n A lypius h u m b ly a c ­
k n o w led g ed his w eak n ess th a t he overcam e th is
tem ptation. S aint A ugustine him self, w hile d e sp e r­
ately try in g to live chastely, suffered re p eated d e ­
feats. It w as only w h e n he realized th a t he could
n o t achieve v icto ry b y his ow n stren g th a n d relied
ex clusively u p o n G o d ’s g race th a t he w as freed
from the shackles w hich h ad k e p t him p riso n e r for
so long. True stren g th is know ing h o w w e ak one is,
because this aw areness is a clarion call th a t one
needs help. G od alw ays listens to those w h o beg
H im to com e to th e ir aid. W h a t a sw eet v ictory
w h en th e v icto r refuses to have laurels p u t on his
ow n h ead an d gives all the cred it to his beloved, his
Savior, his H oly Physician. Indeed, it is only w h en
w e acknow ledge o u r w eakness, as S aint A ugustine
cam e to do, th a t w e becom e strong: “W h e n I h ear
m y fo rm er life b ro u g h t fo rw ard , no m a tte r w ith

55
w h a t in ten tio n it is done, I am n o t so u n g ratefu l as
to be afflicted thereat; for the m ore th ey show up
m y m isery (w eakness), th e m ore I praise m y p h y si­
cian .’’118 W om en definitely have an advantage over
th e stro n g sex because it is easier fo r th em to ac­
know ledge th a t th ey are w eak a n d d ep e n d on di­
vine help. This is w h y the L itu rg y d u b b ed them
“the pious sex .”
This m ight be aptly called “the C hristian revolu­
tio n ,” a scandal for the J e w s an d a foolishness for
th e gentiles. It is the m elody sung b y one saint after
another. It finds a particularly m oving form ulation
and fulfillm ent in S aint Therese of Lisieux's “little
w a y ”: To be unknow n, to be hidden, to b e reg ard ed
as in sig n ifican t a n d m ediocre, to w elcom e o n e ’s
“sm alln ess,” a n d m isery. S he re jo iced w h e n she
m ade a m istake, not because o f th e m istake, b u t b e ­
cause she w as given a chance to taste, once again,
h er w eakness an d helplessness w ith o u t G o d ’s grace.
The Story o f a Soul is a m agnificent praise o f w e ak ­
ness joyfully accep ted a n d tran sfo rm ed b y grace
into su p ern atu ral victory. L et me repeat: It is sw eet
for som eone w ho loves to give credit for victory to
th e beloved, a beloved w ho rs all pow erful, a n d
often chooses “w h a t is w eak an d helpless” to over­
com e th e p ro u d illusion th a t m en are strong a n d do
n o t need help. F rom a su p ern atu ral point of view
th ere is nothing, absolutely nothing, w hich cannot
be tu rn e d to G o d ’s glory. Every defeat can become a vic-

56
tory, ev ery h u m iliatio n a p re cio u s jew el in o n e ’s
crow n, every suffering a glorious m ark th a t m akes
th e sufferer resem ble his Savior. T he alcoholic d e­
claring publicly a t an A A m eeting th a t he is hooked
on booze th e re b y changes his hum iliating defeat
into a m agnificent victory.
T he follow ing passage in The Story o f a Soul is re ­
vealing: “Ah! P o o r w om en, h ow th e y are despised.
A n d y e t m any m ore w om en th a n m en love G od.
D u rin g C h rist’s passion, th ey show ed m ore courage
th a n th e apostles for th ey b ra v ed the insults o f the
soldiers an d d ared to d ry th e adorable face o f Je su s.
F o r this reason, H e allow s w om en to be tre a te d
w ith contem pt on earth, since H e has chosen it for
Him self. In heaven, H e w ill show th a t H is thoughts
are n o t m en ’s th o u g h ts (Isaiah 55:8—9) for th e n the
last will be th e first.”1' 0
In B enedictine spirituality, the m onks p ra y seven
tim es a day: “Deud in adjutorium meum intende; Domine,
ad adjuvandum me fedtina” (“G od, com e to m y aid;
hasten to help m e”). R ecognizing once again th a t
w e co nstantly need divine help a n d su p p o rt n o t to
fall into th e nets th a t the w icked one keeps p u ttin g
in fro n t o f us. Indeed, he is like a “ro arin g lion”
seeking w hom he can devour.120
W h en a p erson called b y G od enters religious life,
he undergoes a period o f trial called the novitiate.
One o f Ltd main purpoded id to dedtroy the novice d natural
delf-addurance a n d to replace it b y an ever-greater

57
realization o f his w eakness, o f the fact th a t w ithout
G od “he can do nothing. ’’ T he m aster o f novices will
show him th a t his natural virtue*) are unbaptized and
need to be purified. H e will gently b u t firm ly lead his
charge to acquire supernatural virtues based on h u ­
mility, th a t is, a total distrust o f oneself an d a total
confidence in G o d ’s grace. The natu ral self-assur­
ance o f the novice is replaced b y a holy “insecurity”:
in o th er w ords, a constant aw areness o f one’s m isery
an d a boundless confidence in H im w ho can raise
children to A braham out o f stone.

58
 PART VI
Womend Supernatural M ission

A gainst th e background, o f w h a t has b een said, w e

can now perceive the b eau ty o f fem ininity as com ing
o u t o f G o d s loving hand, a n d th e glorious m ission
assigned to it w h en fecundated b y the su p ern atu ral.
In an en lig h ten in g talk w h ic h E d ith S tein (now
k n o w n as S ain t E d ith S tein) delivered in S alzb u rg
in 1930, she offered a m asterful p re se n ta tio n o f th e
differences w h ich m ark th e m ale a n d th e fem ale
n a tu re . W o m en a re m o re in te re s te d in p e rs o n s
th a n in things, she claim s. A n d this is tru e indeed.
L et u s im agine th e follow ing scenario: A g ro u p o f
m en a n d w o m e n a re g a th e re d b e h in d a clo sed
door. W h e n th e d o o r is opened, th e y all e n te r a
larg e room w h e re only tw o th in g s are to b e found:
a cradle w ith a n in fan t in it on one side, a n d a
b ra n d n ew co m p u te r on th e other. W o m en w ill
flock to th e cradle; m en (a fter hav in g given a b rie f
glance a t th e b ab y ) w ill o p t fo r th e m asterpiece o f
tech n o lo g y a n d w ill s ta rt “p la y in g ” w ith it w ith

59
passion. W om en w ill ru sh to cuddle th e b ab y and
will rad iate w h en th e little one starts cooing. O b v i­
ously w om en are right, for a child is a m arvel of
G o d ’s creatio n th a t no technological accom plish­
m ent can m atch. D eep dow n, m en m ust kn o w th a t
w om en have m ade the b e tte r choice, b u t it is h ard
for th em to resist the fascination o f technology.
M oreover, w om en place th e concrete over the
abstract, individuals over universals. O n ce again
th ey are right. To m ake this claim does n o t d eni­
g rate th e aw esom e w o rld o f abstraction, w h ich ce r­
tainly deserves o u r intellectual adm iration. B ut it
should be clear th a t th e one concrete tru e God, the
“Deud vivend et vidend” o f S aint A ugustine, is m eta­
physically su p erio r to the noble P latonic w o rld o f
ideas. G re at m etaphysicians have u n d ersto o d th a t
th e ultim ate reality cannot be an abstractio n. T he
ab stract, ho w ev er g reat it m ight be, is m etaphysi­
cally ‘'th in ” in th a t it lacks personhood. It is lum i­
nously clear th a t the one tru e G od cannot be an
“id ea,” a principle. H e m u st be a person.
T he fem ale p syche is m ore responsive to th e p e r­
sonal th a n to th e im personal. W om en re sp o n d th u s
in tu itiv ely , w ith o u t m u ch d e lib e ra tio n , b ecau se
th e y “feel” th a t persons ra n k infinitely hig h er than
non p erso n al beings. W h a t an abyss lies betw een an
im personal “d eity ” a n d the one personal G od o f the
O ld a n d N ew Testam ent, a God W h o is a father,
W h o loves, W h o in stru cts us, W ho w a rn s us, and

60
w h e n necessary, pu n ish es us. H e re again w om en
sco re a n o th e r m etap h y sica l v ictory. A n y so u n d
m etaphysics resp ects th e h ie ra rc h y o f bein g a n d
places p erso n s above things, living th in g s above
nonliving ones. T he one tru e G od is th e G od o f
life; C h rist is th e life o f th e soul, a n d w om en, w ho
h av e th e sublim e m ission o f giving life, intuitively
w eave this p rinciple into th e ir daily lives. E ve w as
called "the m o th er ot th e living.” T h ere is a m eta­
physical b o n d b etw een w om an h o o d a n d life, an d
th is is an h o n o r indeed. T his is w h y a w om an,
w h en she freely chooses to ab o rt h er child (w ithout
any pressure from boyfriend o r parents) no t only
com m its a grave sin b u t w ounds h er fem inine n atu re
to its very core. This is w hy it takes so long for such
w om en to "recover” once th eir eyes have opened an d
they fully realize th a t they have betrayed th eir sa­
cred mission. T hey are then th reaten ed b y self-ha­
tre d an d tem pted by suicide. T hey desperately need
th e loving help o f a holy priest o r a w ise counselor to
com fort them and assure them th a t G o d ’s m ercy is
infinitely greater than our sins, terrible as these m ay
be. It is a mission desperately needed today, w hen
millions o f w om en have either chosen or allow ed
th eir children to be m urdered —and in so doing, they
have m ortally w ou nded their souls.
E d ith Stein fu rth e r claim s th a t w om en are m ore
in terested in w holes th a n in p arts. T heir m inds do
n o t dissect an object; th e y grasp it in totality. This

61
is stated, again, n o t to denigrate th e analytic p o w e r
of m e n ’s m inds, b u t to show th a t th e fem ale n a tu re
is stru c tu ra lly (i.e., w ith o u t d elib eratio n ) g ea red
to w h a t is m etap h y sica lly higher. B ecau se th e ir
m inds a n d th e ir h e a rts are closely re la te d (th eir
m inds w o rk b e st w h e n an im ated b y th e ir h ea rts),
th e ir g ra sp o f p erso n s and objects does n o t fall
in to th e tra p s w h ich th re a te n specialists, w h o no
lo n g er see th e fo rest because o f th e trees. M a n y
g re a t m inds specialize so m uch in one facet o f re ­
ality th a t th e y lose sig h t o f th e w h o le p ic tu re .
C h esterto n m ig h t have h a d th is in m in d w h e n he
w ro te th a t “C leverness shall be left for m en a n d
w isdom for w o m en .”121 A sim ilar th o u g h t has been
e x p ressed b y J o h n B artlett: “W om en are w iser
th a n m en because th ey k n o w less b u t u n d ersta n d
m o re.”122 F o r w isdom is n o t scholarship a n d the
latter is often th e refuge o f people w ho have diplo­
mas, w h o spend th eir lives b e n t on books b u t forget
to liv e! A sim ple Italian p ea san t w om an, say M am a
M a rg a rita —the saintly m o th er o f D o n B osco —ce r­
tainly possessed a rem ark ab le w isdom as educator,
a w isdom w h ich is, alas, v ery often denied to “ex­
p e rts ” in child psychology.
A no th er g reat gift th a t G od has g ra n te d the fe­
m ale n atu re is th e gift o f receptivity. This is no t to
be confused w ith passivity as A ristotle does w hen
he claims th a t th e m ale is superior to the female b e ­
cause he is “active,” w hereas she is passive. C learly

62
passivity is inferior to activity, for one is only being
“ac te d u p o n ." B u t this is n o t tru e o f re cep tiv ity
w h ich involves an alert, aw akened, joyful readiness
to be fecundated by an o th er person o r b y a b ea u ti­
ful object. All created persons are essentially recep ­
tive b ecau se “th e re is n o th in g th a t w e have not
received.”123 W om en feel at hom e in this receptivity
an d m ove in it w ith ease an d grace. This is already
inscribed in th eir biological nature: a wife giving
h erself to h er h u sb an d accepts joyfully to be fecun­
dated, to receive. H e r receptivity is a self-giving.
B u t th e m arvel o f ch ild b irth is th a t even th o u g h
she has only received a living seed —so m icroscopic
th a t it is invisible to th e h u m an eye —a fte r nine
m onths she gives h e r spouse a h u m an being, w ith
an im m ortal soul m ade to G o d ’s im age a n d likeness.
The m om ent o f conception takes place ho u rs after
th e m arital em brace, b u t w h e n th e sperm fe cu n ­
d ates th e fem ale egg w e can assum e (even th o u g h it
has n ever form ally been ta u g h t b y the C h u rch ) th a t
at th a t v e iy m om ent G od creates the child's soul —
a totally n ew soul w hich, being im m aterial, cannot
be p ro d u c e d b y h u m a n b ein g s. G o d th e re fo re
“to u ch es” th e fem ale b o d y in placing this new soul
into th e tem ple o f h er w om b. This is a n o th er in­
c red ib le p riv ileg e th a t th e C re a to r g ra n ts to
w om en. D u rin g pregnancy, she has th e ex tra o rd i­
n ary privilege o f carry in g tw o souls in h er body. If
th o se u n fo rtu n a te w om en w ho consider hav in g an

63
ab o rtio n w ere conscious o f this, it is m ost unlikely
th a t an y o f th em w o u ld co n sen t to th e crim e.
It is w o rth m entioning th a t w hile it is th e h u s­
b a n d w h o fecundates his wife, one says “she has
given h erself to him, ’’ im plying th a t this receptivity
is also a un iq u e donation: To accept to receive is a
v ery special gift. T here are som e u n fo rtu n a te p e r­
sons w h o w o u ld p re fer to die th a n to receive, for
the v ery th o u g h t o f being in d eb ted is repulsive to
them . K ierk eg aard w rites ab o u t th e dem onic d e­
sp air in w h ich a m an prefers th e to rm en ts o f hell to
accepting help, “th e hum iliation o f becom ing n o th ­
ing in th e h an d s o f th e h elp er fo r w hom all things
are po ssib le— ”124 To accept h er state o f creature-
h oo d is easier for a w om an th a n for a m an, w ho is
alw ays tem p ted to be in com m and. H o w m any m en
revolt a t th eir m etaphysical dependence; h ow m any
m en re s e n t b ein g sick a n d w e a k a n d th e re fo re
forced to rely on th e help o f others?
A uth en tic creativity in creatu res depends upon
th e ir d eg ree o f recep tiv ity ; to use P la to n ic la n ­
guage, he w h o p ro d u c es w ith o u t hav in g opened
him self to fecundation b y G od will pro d u ce “b a s­
ta rd s .” M u ch o f w h a t is called “m o d ern a r t” falls
into this category, because th e tem p tatio n o f m any
artists to d ay is no longer to serve, b u t to “e x p ress”
them selves. In this context, G e rtru d von le F o rt
w rites: “T he artist w ho no longer gives G od the
honor, a n d in stead proclaim s only him self, m ust, by

64
excluding th e religious elem ent from culture, p ra c ­
tically elim inate also its w om anly quality.”125
In childbirth, this creative m iracle th a t stem s from
w om anly receptivity is, as w e saw, exem plified in a
unique way. It finds its climax in the w ords o f the
Blessed Virgin w ho only said 'y e s ” to G od’s offer;
she did not “d o ” anything, she sim ply said: “be it done
to me according to T hy w o rd .” As soon as she u t­
tered these holy w ords, she conceived the Savior of
the w orld in the m ystery of h er blessed w om b. She
carried in the tem ple o f h er female organs the King
of th e U niverse W hom the w hole universe cannot
contain. Im p o rtan t as the role of the father is, w om en
collaborate in a v ery special w ay w ith G od’s creation
o f new hum an beings w ho are called upon to serve
H im in this life an d enjoy H im forever in heaven.
Receptivity is a religious category par excellence. T he
k ey to h o lin ess is to let o n e se lf b e to ta lly “r e ­
fo rm ed ” b y divine grace, to say to G od, “do w ith
m e w h a te v er y o u w ill.” M a ry said to th e servants at
th e w ed d in g in C ana, “D o w h a te v er H e tells y o u .”
T h at is th e w ay to holiness. B ecause this ch a ra c te r­
istic is so crucial in religious life, it explains w h y
th e litu rg y calls w om en “the pious sex.” As long as
w o m en are faithful to th e ir “religious” calling the
w o rld is safe. B u t the th re a t m enacing us to d ay is
precisely th e m etaphysical revolt o f fem inists w ho
have totally lost sight o f th e ir vocation because they
have become blend to the supernatural.

65
 A t th e tu rn o f the century, th e F ren c h academ y
offered a p rize to th e p erso n w ho b est an sw ered the
follow ing question: “W h y are th ere m ore m en th a n
w om en in ja ils?” T he aw ard w as given to th e p e r­
son w ho w rote, “because th e re are m ore w om en
th a n m en in ch urches." O n e dread s to th in k o f th e
possibility th a t “th e pious sex” w o u ld let itself be
convinced th a t p ra y e r is only for th e w e ak a n d the
incom petent, m eaningless for those aim ing a t g re a t­
n ess. H e re is a tr u th w o rth m e d ita tin g u p o n :
W om en are m ore g eared to p iety because th e y have
a k een er aw areness o f th e ir w eakness. This is th e ir
tru e s tre n g th .12®

66
0 Women and Feelings

F eelings are o ften d e n ig ra te d in hom ilies a n d in

spiritual direction. W om en are to ld th a t spiritual life
is based n o t on em otions, b u t on faith, will, a n d ra ­
tional th o u g h t. I f b y feelings w e m ean th e flow o f ir­
ra tio n a l em otions th at, like flies, k eep sw arm ing
aro u n d us, this advice should be tak en v ery seri­
ously. N o d o u b t feelings cam be dangerous a n d m is­
leading. B ut as m y late h u sb an d has convincingly
show n in his b o o k The Heart, th e w o rd “feeling” is
equivocal.127 F ailure to clarify such am biguities will
necessarily lead to a disparaging o f feelings. A risto­
tle claim ed th a t w h ereas intelligence a n d free will
are h u m an prero g atives, feelings are experiences
th a t m an shares w ith anim als. In claim ing th a t feel­
ings are sh ared b y m en a n d anim als, A ristotle m ust
have b een th in k in g o f localized physical sensations
(su ch as p a in a n d p leasu re), w h ich in d e e d m an
shares w ith anim als. B oth m en a n d anim als can feel
cold, hunger, th irst, fatigue; all o f these experiences

67
are related to th e b ody and are located in the body.
T h ey are “voices of the body. ”128 A partial truth id not
an error. But, w h en this partial tru th is extended to
include all types o f feelings, it definitely becom es an
e rro r a n d a serious one. T he above-m entioned expe­
riences share one com m on feature: th ey are uninten­
tional, w hich —in the vocabulary o f H u sse rl—m eans
th a t no know ledge o f th e ir cause is necessary in
o rd er for these “feelings” to be experienced. T hey
are definitely nonspiritual, a n d m an shares th em
w ith anim als.129
F eelings can re fe r sec o n d arily to exp erien ces
w h ich are v ery d ifferent from this first type: W e
are th in k in g o f “psychic feelings” such as moods,
d epression (caused b y a physical condition), the
jolliness w h ich m ost people experience w h e n d rin k ­
ing alcoholic beverages, and so on. T hese feelings
have no bodily location—as th e first clearly do —
b u t they share with the first th eir lack of intention-
ality. O n e n eed n ot k n o w th e ir cause in o rd e r to
experience th e m .13®
R a d ic a lly d iffe re n t a re “s p iritu a l fe e lin g s,”
w h ich have n eith er a bodily location n o r lack in ­
te n tio n a lly . T h ey ca n n o t possibly arise in m a n ’s
soul unless he h as an aw aren ess o f w h a t motivates
th ese feelings. O n e ca n n o t love w ith o u t know ing
w h a t o r w h o m one loves, w ith o u t realizing th a t
th is love is a resp o n se to a lovable object; one can ­
n o t h ate w ith o u t an a w aren e ss th a t th is feeling

68
a ro se as a re sp o n se to so m eth in g o r so m eb o d y
h ateful. O n e ca n n o t be g ra te fu l w ith o u t k n ow ing
w h a t w e are g ratefu l for a n d to w hom w e are in ­
d eb ted . C h esterto n does rem ark, how ever, th a t at
one p o in t in his early life, he fo u n d him self in th e
lu d icro u s situ atio n o f feeling g ra te fu l “ ...th o u g h I
h a rd ly k n ew to w h o m .”131
T hese feelings share w ith intelligence a n d w ill the
feature o f intentionality; th a t is w h y th ey fully d e­
serve to be called “sp iritual.” O u r responses to the
objects or persons m otivating o u r feeling can be a p ­
p ro p riate o r not. B ecause o f original sin, m an is,
alas, cap ab le o f giving w ro n g a n d d isto rte d r e ­
sponses. O n e can hate w h a t is lovable; one can re ­
joice over evil deeds; one can be saddened b y the
happiness o f o th er persons, an d be elated b y th eir
u nhappiness idchadenfreude). In such cases, o u r ille­
gitim ate response creates a cacophony, a false note
in th e sym phony o f the universe. I t should not be.
But, w ith G o d ’s grace, m an is capable o f tra n ­
scending his n arro w subjectivism , his ten d en cy to
look at events exclusively from the point o f view of
his interest, a n d give w h a t m y late h u sb an d called “a
value resp o n se,” th a t is, to love w h a t deserves to be
loved, to love m ore w h a t is higher, to love less w h a t
is low er.13-1 C enturies ago, P lato w ro te th a t one of
th e aim s o f education is to teach the child "... to hate
w h a t should be h ated an d to love w h a t should be
loved.”133 B y hearkening to this m essage, m an joins

69
his hum ble voice to th e sym phony o f th e universe,
proclaim ing G o d ’s greatness, beauty, a n d tru th .
It is n o tew o rth y th a t these spiritual responses
n o t only share th e features th a t intellect a n d will
possess, (e.g., one can n o t love w ith o u t know ing the
object of o n e’s love), b u t durpadd them in richnedd and
plenitude. In sp iritu al response, m a n ’s in tellect is
fully activated. T he role o f the will is also crucial,
fo r o u r spiritual affective responses m ust be “san c­
tioned" by o u r w ill (in m y h u sb a n d ’s term inology);
this sanctioning m akes them tru ly to becom e ours.
All feelings w h ich have n o t been "sealed" by o u r
will, are likely to w ith e r a n d die. Like the statues o f
D aedalus, th ey m ust be “nailed" to gain th eir full
validity.1^ W h a t a difference exists b etw een a p e r­
son feeling com passion a n d one stren g th en ed b y a
will to be com passionate and, therefore, anxious to
act co m p assionately w h en actions are called for.
T he folly of claim ing th a t one is com passionate an d
y e t refusing to help has b een ironically expressed in
a p lay o f N estroy, an A u strian playw right: A rich
m an w itnessing the abject m isery oi a beg g ar o r­
ders his servants to “th ro w this beg g ar dow n the
steps; his m isery break s m y h eart." W h a t a differ­
ence th ere is betw een a feeling o f contrition a n d th e
w ill to go to confession a n d ask for forgiveness.
Feelings are fu rth er view ed as “in fe rio r' because
th ey cannot be com m anded. B ut this argum ent is
unconvincing: G race cannot be com m anded b y the

70
will either, not because it is “inferior” b u t because it
is “superior.” It is an u nm erited gift. Those w ho have
experienced m om ents o f ra d ia n t spiritual jo y an d
pro fo u n d peace k now th a t these feelings are “gifts”
for w hich w e should be grateful, a n d w hich G od can
tak e aw ay from us w h en H e so wishes. S aint Teresa
o f A vila w rites em phatically th a t sp iritu al joys
should not be “so ught” an d pursued. W hen received,
they call for gratitude. B ut o u r h ea rt should no t rest
in them an d lose its peace w hen they are tak en away.
T he crucial role played, how ever, b y th e w ill in
sp iritual feelings is strikingly expressed m b o th the
cerem ony of m arriage a n d the tak in g o f religious
vow s: T he b rid e, th e brid eg ro o m , o r th e novice
m akes a solem n d eclaration th a t gives to th e ir love
o f each o th er o r o f G od its full validity. T he fiances
love each other; th e p o stu lan t loves G od. N o w th ey
ard en tly w a n t to form alize this feeling, a n d give it
its full w eig h t a n d p lenitude b y declaring solem nly
th a t even th o u g h th e ir feeling o f love for each o ther
o r for G od m ay w ane (due to th e frailty o f hu m an
n ature, d ue to physiological conditions, due to p e ri­
ods o f trial), th ey k n o w th a t these feelings (w hich
m ay be h id d en from them in th e m ystery o f th eir
souls) are still fully (su p e ractu a lly ) p re se n t a n d
valid, because th ey are ratified b y th e ir wills. This
rem ains fully tru e even th o u g h th e jo y o f experi­
encing love has m om entarily been tak en aw ay from
them . Love will continue to m anifest itself in acts of

71
kindness, faithfulness, a n d p ra y e r in m om ents o f
total aridity. T hese are periods o f trial d u rin g w hich
one can p ro v e one's faithfulness (fid&d m eans bo th
"belief” a n d “faith fulness”). H o w m an y saints have
gone th ro u g h a p erio d o f intense dryness d u rin g
w h ich th e y no lo n g er "felt” th a t th e y loved G od,
b u t p ersev ered a t H is service w ith heroic courage.
V ery often, th is cross w as tak en from them shortly
before death. S aint J o h n o f th e C ross has described
m ore eloquently th a n anyone else "the d a rk night
o f th e soul.” T he crucial p o in t is th a t "love” is still
th e re , b u t no lo n g e r ex p e rie n c e d , no lo n g e r a
source o f delight. T he saint th e n w alks in th e d a rk ­
ness o f faith. B u t it is a sign o f m a n ’s g reatness how
freely he can d en y him self th e freedom to change
his m ind: T his is th e v ery essence o f vow s.
T h erefo re th e tra d itio n a l suspicion th a t m an y
religiously m in d ed people have h a d to w a rd feel­
ings is u n w a rran te d . True, o u r feelings m u st be p u ­
rified, b u t th is is equally tru e o f o u r intellect a n d o f
o u r will. K ierk eg aard w ro te th a t th e sins o f th e in ­
tellect are o ften w o rse th a t th e sins o f passions (d e­
railed affectiv ity ): “O h! T he sins o f passions a n d o f
th e h eart, h o w m uch n e a re r to salvation th a n th e
sins o f re a so n .”135 In his p ow erful novel Oblomov,
G o n ch aro v p u ts th e follow ing w o rd s in th e m outh
of his heroine: " ...it is a b a d h ab it w ith m en to be
asham ed o f th e ir heart. T h at is false prid e. T hey
h a d b e tte r be som etim es ash am ed o f th e ir intel-

72
le c t—it goes a stra y m ore o ften ."136 T he p o in t is
th a t it is o u r h e a rt w hich is v ulnerable and, th e re ­
fore, makes as realize our weakness, w h ich is d istaste­
ful to m asculine pride. It w as the h e a rt o f C h rist
th a t w as p ierced b y the so ld ier’s spear. B ecause o u r
sp iritu al feelings com e from o u r heart, a n d because
m a n ’s h e a rt m ust be tran sfo rm ed from a h e a rt o f
stone into a h e a rt o f flesh, it is clear th a t p urifica­
tio n o f sp iritual feeling is crucial in th e process o f
m a n ’s sanctification.137
T he h ea rt (the tabernacle o f affectivily) sym bol­
izes the w hole person. W hen one falls in love, one
says to th e beloved, “I give y o u m y heart." It w ould
be strange indeed if one said “I give y o u m y intellect,
o r m y will, or m y mem ory." It is w ritten in the Bible:
“Give me y o u r h e a rt.”138 B ut it is also tru e th a t the
h u m an h ea rt can incarnate w ickedness a n d co rru p ­
tio n .139 It th ere fo re sym bolizes th e b e st a n d the
w o rst in m an. M a n ’s daily p ra y er should be “m ake
m y h ea rt like u n to yours." In the saints a n d in the
wise, intellect, will, an d h ea rt are fully purified.
T he n o b ility o f rig h t feelings a n d th e ir im por­
tan ce in sp iritual life is pow erfully illu stra te d in the
autob io g rap h ies o f b o th S aint T eresa o f Avila an d
S ain t T herese o f Lisieux. H o w often th e y use the
w o rd “feeling," yet, hopefully, no one w o u ld d are
accuse th em o f subjectivism a n d illusionism . W h en
ask ed b y h er confessor how she k n ew th a t it w as
C h rist th a t w as p re sen t to her, the g re at S panish

73
m ystic an sw ered th a t she "felt it” (“lo dentia" ).140
She w as right, for H e tru ly w as p re sen t to her. B ut
she also w as fully aw are, from having to deal w ith
m any nuns, th a t feelings can be th e fruits o f self-
c e n te re d n e ss, sen tim en tality , em otionalism , o r
oversusceptibility, so she w a g ed a relentless w a r
against th ese crippling dangers. She k n ew th a t w e
can "feel” offended o r deeply h u rt, o r w o u n d e d b e ­
cause w e have been justly criticized.141

T he litu rg y of the H oly C hurch gives testim o ny to

th e role o f th e h e a rt in religious life; she has blessed
u s w ith a litany to the S acred H e a rt of J e su s. T here
is no litany ded icated to th e divine intellect o r the
divine will. W h en C h rist in agony spoke th e heart-
b re a k in g w o rd s —"I am th irs ty ” —th e H o ly O n e
w as th irstin g for o u r love. T he h e a rt is w h ere love
resides. T he h e a rt needs to be vindicated a n d this
can b e st be ach iev ed b y d istin g u ish in g b etw e en
valid a n d invalid feelings, legitim ate a n d illegitim ate
feelings, "baptized feelings a n d u n b ap tize d o n es.”
Failing to "d iscrim inate” betw een them inevitably
leads to a d en igration o f this rich field o f hum an
experiences, a n d w as b o u n d to have a negative effect
on women w ho, traditionally, have been called “the
h e a rt o f th e fam ily.”
T he greatest and deepest religious an d hum an ex­
periences are related to the heart. It is o u r h ea rt th at

74
m akes us vulnerable. T he h ea rt o f the S avior w as
“b ru ised b y o ur sins.”^ 2 It is the h ea rt th a t loves,
th a t is merciful, th a t has com passion, th a t feels con­
tritio n , th a t cries o v er sins, th a t is w o u n d e d b y
w ickedness. S aint F ran c is’ h e a rt w as bleeding “b e ­
cause love w as so little loved.” It is th e h e a rt th a t
suffers with th e beloved an d w ould be h ap p y to suf­
fer fo r th e beloved. C hrist tells us th a t “H e is m eek
a n d hum ble o f h e a rt.”
S piritual guidance aims at purifying m an ’s intel­
lect a n d leading it to an ever-greater a n d deeper
know ledge o f tru th ; it aim s at strengthening the will.
B u t w ise spiritual guidance should show g re at con­
cern n o t only for the elim ination o f illegitim ate feel­
ings, b u t also for the blossom ing o f noble, sublime,
a n d generous feelings w hich flow er in a p u re heart.
T h at holiness carries w ith it a transform ation o f the
h e a rt is show n b est b y th e ten d ern ess th a t g reat
m ale saints exude. L et us th in k o f S aint B ern ard
a n d his ho m ily u p o n th e d e a th o f his belo v ed
brother, G erard: “C ruel death! B y tak in g aw ay one,
th o u has killed tw o at once; for the life w hich is left
to me is heav ier th a n death. S aint F rancis of
Sales also com es to m ind: his innum erable letters
express a sw eetness adm irably com bined w ith holy
m an liness. T h ese saints, m asterp ie ces o f G o d ’s
grace, com bine all g re at m ale v irtu es w ith female
gentleness. G re at fem ale saints, w hile keep in g the
perfu m e o f fem ale gentleness, can show a stren g th

75
a n d courage th a t sociology usually reserves to the
m ale sex. It is typical o f the su p ern atu ral th a t such
ap p a ren tly co n tra d icto ry featu res can be h arm o ­
niously united.

Som e m ay claim th a t the m etaphysical inferiority of

feelings is clearly p ro v e n b y th e fact th a t th e body
is involved w ith them (for exam ple, o u r h e a rt beats
faster w h en w e experience a g reat joy o r fear). To
d en y th a t physical m anifestations o f p ro fo u n d sp ir­
itual experiences can validly a n d m eaningfully be
ex pressed in th e hu m an b o d y is a prejudice th a t
should be erad icated from a C hristian m ind. F rom
th e beginning, C h ristianity has w ag ed w a r on any
form o f gnosticism —th is ev e r-re c u rrin g e rro r of
despising th e flesh, b o rn of p ride. F o r th e W o rd it­
self becam e flesh. Since th e g re atest event in his­
to ry to o k place, it is clea r th a t w e sh o u ld n o t
despise physical m anifestations o f deep psychic a n d
sp iritu al experiences. T his tru th is also ex pressed in
th e C an ticle o f C anticles: “dtipate me malid, quia
amore Langueo” (“refresh me w ith apples, for I am
sick w ith love”) . 144 M an is a union o f b o d y an d
soul; ju st as th e b o d y will p a rta k e o f m a n ’s b ea ti­
tu d e o r o f his dam nation, it is p ro p e r a n d classical
th a t in th e co u rse o f th is e a rth ly life, th e b o d y
should m irro r th e experiences o f the soul. F a r from
being an in d ication o f inferiority, the connection

76
b etw een b o d y a n d em otion sheds light on the deep
link existing betw een m a n ’s b o d y a n d his soul. The
m ost p o w erfu l m anifestation o f th e union betw een
soul an d b o d y is to be found m th e p h enom enon of
stigm ata. O n e certain ly can re ach sainthood w ith ­
ou t d uplication o f the w o u n d s o f o u r Savior. B ut
th a t th ere are cases, fully validated, in w h ich m a n ’s
b o d y p arta k es o f th e to rtu re s th a t C h rist suffered
w h en crucified, is a p o w erful expression o f b o th the
un io n o f b o d y a n d soul, a n d o f the closeness w hich
exists betw een a creatu re b u rn in g w ith love for its
creator, a n d gratefully p arta k in g in th e im m ensity
o f H is pains.
S a in t B en ed ic t h as u n d e rs to o d th is u n io n so
deeply th at, in his Rule, he keeps stressing th e im ­
p o rtan c e in religious life o f a re v ere n t bodily p o s­
tu re. It does m ake a difference w h e th e r m an kneels
o r stands, w h e th e r one bow s or not, w h e th e r one
sits straig h t o r yields to “th e law o f gravity. ’’ O n e of
th e reg rettab le things w h ich have ta k e n place in the
w ak e o f V atican II is th a t all these so-called “ex te­
rio r” m an ifestatio n s o f p iety w h ich sp eak to the
senses o f th e b o d y have b een abolished. S tatu es
have been rem oved from o u r C hurches; the violet
cloths th a t u sed to cover statues from P assion S u n ­
d ay o n w ard are no lo nger used. So m any ex terio r
rem in d ers th a t w e are h ere on this ea rth to serve
G od have b een elim inated, w ith all th e deplorable
c o n se q u en ce s th a t w e n o w know . In m y hom e

77
country, w h a t u sed to be C atholic B elgium , one
could n o t tak e a w alk in the beautiful forest su r­
ro u n d in g the capital, o r in th e countryside, w ith o u t
seeing sm all little chapels d ed icated to C hrist, H is
H o ly M other, o r som e saint. It w as a co n stan t re ­
m in d er th a t faith should anim ate all o u r actions.
T he devil is a m aster psychologist a n d know s ex­
actly h ow m uch w e dep en d upon visual p ercep tio n s
to b u ttress o u r faith. D estro y in g the physical signs
o f farth th a t m ove o u r affective reception certainly
w as n o t o rd e red b y th e tex ts o f V atican II. W h o is
th e culprit?

T he g re a t defense o f th e b o d y a n d th e nobility o f
its relatio n to feeling is the p ro fo u n d fact o f the
R esu rrectio n . H o w deeply C h ristia n is th e dogm a
o f th e re su rre c tio n o f th e body: To b e h u m an is to
b e a p erso n in c a rn a te d in a body. It is th ere fo re
p ro p e r a n d ju st th a t this com panion o f o u r earth ly
life sho uld p a rta k e in th e g lo ry o r ignom iny o f o u r
etern al fate. M a n s soul is im m ortal a n d survives
th e d e s tru c tio n o f his body; b u t th e fullness o f
hu m an n a tu re calls fo r th e re su rrec tio n o f th e flesh.
T he soul can exist w ith o u t th e body, b u t is widowed
when the body died; it th e n longs fo r th e re u n io n w ith
its com panion.
T he conclusion w e can d ra w from this b rie f su r­
vey o f feelings is th a t it is u n w a rra n te d to reg ard

78
w o m en as inferior because feelings p lay a central
role in th eir lives. If the feelings v ib ratin g in th eir
h e a rts are n o b le, a p p ro p ria te , good, legitim ate,
sanctioned, a n d pleasing to G od, th e n th e y are p re ­
cious jew els in G od's sight.

79
.
 PART VIII

The M ystery of the Female Body

S aint B onaventure w rites th a t the w o rld is like a

book heralding the greatness o f the Creator, b u t w e
m ust learn to read its message. H e w ho has m astered
this a rt th ro u g h grace will discover th at the contem ­
plation o f creation provides the soul w ith rich spiri­
tu al food. H e w hose eyes are opened will be able to
decipher the divine m essage issuing from inanim ate
nature, plants, animals, clouds, the sky. T hey all sing
th e praise of the great King. N atu ral beauty speaks
eloquently ab out the B eauty of the C reator th at it
m odestly reflects. T hey are G od’s footprints (vestigia),
S ain t B o n av en tu re tells u s .145 O n ce this tru th is
grasped, Saint P au l’s exhortation th a t w e should be
praying at all times becom es not only un d erstan d ­
able, b u t easy to follow.146 F o r everything in creation
speaks of God, provided w e are willing to open our
eyes an d ears to it. The same thought is expressed in
S aint Francis o f Sales. This gentle saint stresses re­
peatedly th at th e cosmos is rich in analogies elevating

81
o ur m inds an d souls from the m aterial to the spiri­
tual, from the created to the C reator.147
A contem plation o f the fem ale body can yield
rich insights into the m ission o f w om en. T he first
th in g th a t com es to m ind is th a t in h er b o d y the in ­
tim ate organs are n o t visible. T hey are all “h id d e n ”
w ith in her. In this, she differs clearly from h er male
co u n terp art. This fact is rich in sym bolism : W h a t is
h id d e n u su a lly re fe rs to so m eth in g m y sterio u s,
som ething th a t should be p ro tec ted from indiscreet
looks. T he v ery stru c tu re o f h e r b o d y sym bolizes a
g ard en th a t should be carefully g u ard ed , fo r th e
keys o f this g ard en belong to G od. It is H is p ro p ­
e rty in a special sense a n d is to be k e p t u n to u ch ed
u n til H e allow s th e b rid e-to -b e to give th e keys to
h er h u sb an d -to -b e o f w h a t is called, in th e C anticle
o f C an ticles, a "hortiid conchuud” (“a clo sed g a r­
d e n ”). ^ H o w beautiful w hen, on the n ight o f h er
w ed d in g , th e y o u n g b rid e can say to th e b rid e ­
groom : “I have k e p t this g a rd en unsullied for you;
now th a t G od has received o u r pledge to live our
m arrie d life in H is sight (in condpectu D ei), I am
g ra n te d th e perm ission to give y o u th e keys to this
gard en , an d I tru s t th a t y o u w ill ap p ro ach it w ith
fe ar a n d trem b lin g .” H o w v e ry sad w h e n this g a r­
d en has alre ad y b een tra m p le d u p o n b y im pure
feet a n d ra v ag ed b y lust. T he b rid eg ro o m should
be rem in d ed th a t G o d ’s perm ission is re q u ire d in
o rd e r fo r him to p e n e tra te into th is sacred enclo-

82
sure, a n d th a t he sh ould do so w ith b o th reverence
a n d g ratitu d e.
T he m ysterious ch a ra c te r o f this g a rd en is an
em blem a n d a repetition, a figura, o f th e greatest
ev en t th a t has tak en place in history: T he In c a rn a ­
tio n — G od becom ing m an, h id d en fo r nine m onths
in th e w om b o f th e m ost p erfect o f all creatu re s —
th e V irgin M ary. T h at this event w as w ra p p e d in a
d eafening silence (S am t J o s e p h w as n o t even in­
form ed) is p ro fo u n d ly m eaningful. T he w o rld w as
fo rev er changed, an d no one k n ew ab o u t it except a
h u m b le V irgin. S ecular events tak e place w ith a
bang; G o d ’s m ysteries are secret a n d hidden. This
is w h y it w as p ro p e r th a t this overw helm ing event
w as b u ried in holy silence.
N o t only are th e female organs "hidden,” th ey are
also veiled. A veil symbolizes bo th m ystery an d sa­
cred n ess. W h e n M oses cam e d o w n from M o u n t
Sinai w h ere he h ad been perm itted to h ear G od’s
voice, he veiled his face as an appropriate response
to his overw helm ing privilege. In Catholic churches,
th e ta b ern acle is veiled w h e n th e divine h o st is
p resen t. This "veil” is so essential to fem ininity th a t
S ain t A ugustine w rote th a t even w hen a female child
is the fruit of rape, fornication, or adultery, h er little
b o d y is not denied this m ysterious covering.1^9 The
veil o f virginity is a very special female privilege.
In view o f th e ex tra o rd in a ry d ignity th a t v irg in ­
ity has a c q u ire d in C h ristia n life, th e biological

83
m ak e-u p o f w o m en indicates th a t th e ir re p ro d u c ­
tive o rgans are stam p ed b y sacred n ess a n d belong
to G od in a special sense. H ence, w om an's m ission
is to be th e g u ard ia n o f purity. In view o f this in ­
sight, it becom es u n d e rsta n d a b le th a t, tra d itio n ­
ally, a w o m an w ho has sin n ed against th e S ixth
C o m m a n d m e n t is m o re sev e rely fro w n e d u p o n
th a n h er m ale c o u n te rp a rt. In a n d b y itself, this
m ay strike one as a typical case o f injustice: F o r in
fro n t o f G od, th e sin o f fornication or a d u lte ry is
equally severe w h e th e r p e rp e tra te d b y a m an o r b y
a w om an. B u t w h e n w e realize th a t th e intim ate
sp h ere is especially confided to w o m e n —th a t th e y
sh o u ld be th e g u ard ia n s o f th e v irtu e o f p u r ity —
th e se v e n ty o f social censure on fallen w om en b e ­
com es m o re u n d e rs ta n d a b le . When a particular
middion id confided to dome perdond, and thede perdond fa il
to redpond to itd demandd, it created a greater metaphydi-
cal didharmony than when the dame failure id to be found
in domeone who had not received thid dpecial calling. By
b etray in g this calling, th e y stain them selves in a
special w ay. E v en th o u g h g ra v e in ju stices h av e
b een co m m itted in this dom ain (how m an y w om en
have b een m ercilessly ostracized from society b e ­
cause th e y have fallen, w h e n m en are often ex ­
cu sed w ith th e w o rd s, “th e y w e re sow ing th e ir
w ild o a ts”), th is “in ju stice” is ro o ted in a ta c it ac ­
k n o w led g m en t th a t w om en have received a special
m issio n . D e e p d ow n, so ciety u n d e r s ta n d s th a t

84
w o m e n ’s p u rity is a linchpin o f a n y C h ristia n soci­
ety, n a y o f a n y civilized society. W h e n she b etray s
h e r m ission, n o t on ly is G o d o ffe n d e d b u t in
w o u n d in g h e rs e lf s p iritu a lly she w o u n d s th e
C h u rc h a n d society at large.
T h e u n io n o f b o d y a n d soul is, in som e way,
p a rtic u la rly close in a w o m a n ’s body. S he is “in ­
c a rn a te d ” in h e r b o d y in a special w ay. T his is
w h y , w h e n sh e giv es h erself, sh e gives h e rs e lf
com pletely; w h e n she stain s herself, th e stain is
p a rtic u la rly d am aging. B u t C atholicism , ric h in
m e rc y a n d in hope, teac h es us th a t G o d can m ake
all th in g s new. T h o u g h “th e rich w o rth o f y o u r
v irg in ity ”160 ca n n o t be re g a in e d w h e n lost, G o d ’s
m ercy, in resp o n se to te a rs o f co n tritio n , can n ev ­
erth eless elevate th e sin n e r a n d m ake h e r to b e ­
com e a g re a t saint. S ain t M a iy M ag d a le n e com es
to m y m ind. T he sam e is tru e o f S ain t M a rg u e rite
o f C o rto n a.
O n th e o th er hand, those w ho have b een p ro ­
te c te d b y G o d ’s grace should hum bly th a n k H im .
T h ey should say in th e ir heart: “N o t to us, O Lord,
n o t to us, b u t to T h y nam e give glory.”161 W oe to
th e v irgin w hose p u rity is stained b y pride, w ho
gloats over h er virginity, w ho feels “p re cio u s” a n d
su p erio r because “she is u n to u c h e d ,” a n d h arb o rs
th e erro n eo u s belief th a t h e r “v irtu e ” is due to h er
ow n m erit. T he w o rd s o f C h rist th e n com e to m ind:
“...p ro s titu te s will p recede y o u in h eav en .”16-1

85
H u sb a n d a n d w ife are called u p o n to collaborate
w ith G od in th e creation o f an o th er hum an being.
B ut they m ust rem em ber th a t being creatures they
can only “procreate," they cannot create. Unless the
h u sb an d ’s body has living seeds, unless the wife's
body has eggs, the process of fertilization cannot take
place. Some preexisting m atter is no t only necessary,
it is essential in o rd er for procreation to be realized.
G od alone can create the soul, it cannot originate
from either parent. The soul is no t m ade of some p re ­
existing m atter. It is a totally new creation. H um an
beings cannot produce som ething out o f nothing.
The special role granted to w om en in procreation,
as m entioned before, is highlighted b y the fact th at as
soon as she has conceived (and conception takes place
hours after the m arital em brace), G od creates the soul
of the new child in her body. This implies a direct “con­
tact” betw een H im an d the m other-to-be, a contact in
w hich the father plays no role whatever. This contact
gives to the female body a note o f sacredness, for any
closeness betw een G od and one ol H is creatures is
stam ped b y H is H oly Seal. This divine “to u ch ” is once
again a special female privilege th at every pregnant
w om an should gratefully acknowledge.
If sex education in o u r schools refrained from
sp ea k in g a b o u t m oral p e rv e rsio n s a n d v ario u s
m ethods o f artificial b irth control a n d instead tau g h t

86
th ese sublim e C atholic tru th s, chastity w ould, once
again, becom e for y o u n g people th e lum inous b e a ­
con th a t it h a d b een for centuries w h e n C atholic
life w as v ib ran t.
C h ild b irth is also an event b ask e d in sacredness.
G ra n te d th a t th e agonizing pains th a t m an y w om en
e n d u re are a dire consequence o f original sin, the
b e a u ty o f C atholic teaching m akes it clear th a t h er
w o m an ly travails a n d cries o f agony, w h ich p recede
th e com ing into th e w o rld o f an o th er h u m an p e r­
son, have a deeply sym bolic m eaning. J u s t as C hrist
has suffered th e agonizing pains o f th e crucifixion
in o rd e r to reo p en for us th e gates o f heaven, so th e
w o m an has received th e costly privilege o f suffer­
in g so th a t a n o th e r child m ade to G o d ’s im age a n d
likeness can e n te r into th e w orld. In a sim ilar co n ­
tex t, C h esterto n w rites, “N o one sta rin g a t th a t
frig h tfu l fem ale privilege, can quite believe in the
eq u ality o f th e sexes__ ”153 D u rin g pregnancy, the
m o th er-to -b e actu ally carries tw o souls w ith in h e r­
self: h e r ow n a n d th e one o f h e r baby. C h esterto n
m u st have h ad som ething sim ilar in m ind w h e n he
w ro te, “N o th in g can ever overcom e th a t one e n o r­
m ous sex superiority, th a t even th e m ale child is
b o rn closer to his m o th er th a n to his fa th e r.”15^

O u r great concern th ro u g h o u t this book has been to

elim inate th e deeply rooted prejudice w hich foolishly

87
asse rts th a t th e w hole o f Ju d e o -C h ris tia n tra d i­
tio n — a n d v ery p articu larly the C atholic C h u rch —
h as d iscrim in ated ag ain st w om en. B u t th e new s
m edia h ave b een so efficient a t p ro p a g atin g this
n ew “gospel” th a t m an y n u n s left th e ir convents
an d jo in ed th e u n h a p p y arm y o f w om en w hose v o ­
cation is to fight "sexism ”—a new ly discovered cap­
ital s in —w hich, in th eir eyes, is so grav e th a t o th er
offenses against G od seem to pale by com parison.
S uch trag ic a b e rra tio n s are possible only in the
souls w h o se sense o f th e s u p e rn a tu ra l has been
w arp ed , nay, destroyed.

THE MYSTERY OF F E MI N I N I T Y
T he w om an is m ore m ysterious th a n h er m ale com ­
panion. O n th e artistic level, th is is strikingly ex­
p ressed in one o f th e g re atest o f all paintings, the
Alona Lida o f L eo nardo d a Vinci. O n e can look at
this m asterpiece for hours; th e m ore one looks a t it,
th e m o re one feels th e m y stery th a t th is fem ale
presen ce radiates. It is inconceivable th a t a m ale
p o rtra it could visibly express such an unfathom able
d epth. F o r this reason m en often com plain "that
th ey can n o t u n d ersta n d th e fem ale psyche." B eing
m ore “linear," m ore g u id ed b y ratio n al co n sid era­
tions, less subtle, m en m u st learn to " tran sce n d ”
them selves in o rd e r to e n ter into a deep com m un­
ion w ith th e ir fem ale co u n terp art. W om en, too, will
have to achieve a sim ilar a c t o f tran scen d en ce to

88
u n d e rsta n d m a n ’s psyche, b u t it is probably less
difficult for them to do so th a n for men to u n d er­
stan d w om en. She is, b y nature, m ore receptive,
m ore tu n e d to others. It is easier for her to feel em ­
pathy, to feel h erself into others.
It is th erefo re ap p ro p ria te to speak of the “m ys­
te ry o f fem ininity.” T his m ystery is symbolized, as
w e saw, b y th e veil, w h ich m ight be one of the re a ­
sons w h y S ain t P aul recom m ended th at w om en’s
h ead s sh ould be co v ered in church. It is re g ret­
tab le th a t this deeply m eaningful custom w hich —
fa r from dem ean in g w om en, as the feminists rep eat
ad nauseam, w as a w ay o f h o n o rin g them —has been
ab a n d o n ed afte r V atican II, even though it w as in
no w ay d em an d ed b y th e C ouncil.
W e have pointed out th a t the reproductive organs
o f the w om an are hidden in h er body; they are not
“exterior,” th ey are no t visible. F o r these various rea­
sons, it is justified to say th a t the “second sex” is
w ra p p ed in m ystery; w hen w om en betray the m ys­
te ry confided to them they h u rt not only themselves,
b u t society at large, and very especially the Church.
T he fearful sexual decadence th a t w e have w itnessed
in the course o f the last forty years can be traced
back, at least in part, to the fashion w orld’s system­
atic attem p t to eradicate in girls the “holy bashful­
n e ss” w h ich is th e p ro p e r re sp o n se th a t w om en
should give to w h a t is personal, intim ate, and calls
fo r veiling. To d ress m odestly is th e appropriate

89
response th a t w om en should give to th eir “m ystery.”
NobUdJe obiige. The fashions o f the day are all geared
to w ard destroying w o m en s sensitivity for the dig­
nity o f th eir sex. D eep sadness is called for w h en one
w atches W estern girls ru n n in g a ro u n d practically
n aked an d th en com pare them w ith how the H in d u
o r M oslem w om en are clothed w ith modesty, grace,
an d dignity. N o doubt, a m asterm ind has initiated
these decadent fashions w hich aim at destroying fe­
male m odesty.155 The state o f o ur contem porary so­
ciety sheds light on th e fact th a t w hen w om en “no
longer k now how to blush,” it is a p o rten t th a t this
society is on th e verge o f m oral collapse. W om en
carry a heavy share o f guilt because they b etray their
hum an an d m oral missron. W hen w om en are pure,
m en will respect, nay, venerate them ; they will also
h ear the call challenging them to chastity.
E d u catio n in m odesty should begin a t th e earli­
est age. L ittle girls should be gently tra in e d to re ­
sp e c t th e ir bo dies. S a in t B en ed ic t u n d e rsto o d
deeply th e effects th a t o u r b o d y language, o u r b o d ­
ily p o stu res have on o u r souls. This includes one's
w ay o f dressing; one's w ay o f sitting; n o t crossing
o n e ’s legs in a m an n er w h ich can be offensive, not
w earin g sh o rts w hich, although acceptable for the
m ale sex, are likely to u n d erm in e th e fem ale respect
fo r th e m ystery o f h e r body.
It is n o te w o rth y th a t w h e re a s th e re are special
m asses fo r apo stles, popes, b ishops, confessors,

90
a b b o ts, a n d m a rty rs, fo r w om en th ere are only
tw o categories: v irg in a n d nonvirgin; m artyrs a n d
n o n m arty rs. T he H o ly B ride o f C hrist dedicates a
special litu rg y fo r v irgins. N o such privilege exists
fo r celibate p riests. In so doing, the C hurch ac ­
k n o w led g es th e special d ig n ity G od has chosen to
give to w om en. T his seem s to indicate th at v irgin­
ity differs fro m celibacy. W h ereas both celibacy
a n d v irg in ity sym bolize a to ta l self-donation to
G od, v irg in ity h as an ad d itio n al virtue: the conse­
c ra tio n o f an o rg a n (nam ely the female w om b)
w h ich , th ro u g h G o d ’s infinite mercy, has sheltered
th e G o d -m an fo r nine m onths. M ay we suggest
th a t th e fact th a t th e fem ale organs are hidden b y
a veil w as a p re sag in g th a t, in G od’s plans, a fe­
m ale w o m b w as to hide th e K ing of Glory, “H im
th a t th e w h o le u n iv erse ca n n o t contain?"
If little girls w ere m ade aw are of the great mys-
te iy confided to them , th e ir p u rity w ould be guar­
anteed. T he v e iy reverence w hich they would have
to w a rd th e ir ow n bodies w o u ld inevitably be p er­
ceived b y th e o th er sex. M en are talented at read­
ing w o m en ’s b o d y language, a n d they are not likely
to risk being h u m iliated w h e n a refusal is certain.
P erceiving w o m en ’s m odesty, th e y w ould take their
cue and, in retu rn , ap p ro ach th e female sex with
reverence, in stead o f w ith to d a y ’s brutal irrever­
ence w h ich unleashes lust a n d im purity.

91
 .^ .
T he secularistic G ospel teaches us th a t sex is an in ­
stinct w h ich in no w a y differs from o th er instincts
such as h u n g er o r th irs t.15^ T he th e o ry p rev alen t
to d ay is th a t ju st as the la tte r instincts cry for ful­
fillment, th e sexual “d riv e ” has its ow n rights, a n d
m an should listen to its needs a n d re sp o n d to its
m essage. Y oung people are told th a t sex is “healthy"
a n d th a t to rep ress it can lead to all sorts o f p sy ch o ­
logical d istu rb an ces, com plexes, a n d so on. This
secularistic gospel ex p lain s w hy, in th e w a k e o f
V atican II, m an y p rie sts a n d n u n s h av e b ro k e n
th eir vow s a n d m arried. Som e o f them literally p a n ­
ick ed u p o n discov ering th a t, b ein g virgins, th e y
w ere “psychologically" crippled. T hey naively b e­
lieved th a t th e y h a d finally fo u n d th e k ey to all
th e ir problem s.
In fact, it u) riot true, that je x uf an instinct Like hunger
and thirot. N o t only is sex alw ays deep a n d serious
(w hich can n o t be said o f o th er instincts), it is defi­
n itely m ean t to b e a t th e service o f th e d eep est
hu m an aspiration: love. It is love alone th a t gives
sex its tru e m eaning, w h ich w ill forever rem ain h id ­
den to th e p erso n w ho only perceives its biological
aspect. T h a t sex differs ra d ic ally from o th e r in ­
stincts should be clear from th e fact th a t a n o th er
p erso n is involved. F o o d is in an im ate a n d so is
drink. B u t in sex m an has a p a rtn e r a n d this p art-

92
ner, b eing a p erso n m ade to God s image and like­
ness, m u st b e ap p ro a c h e d w ith reverence. H ow
m any p erso n s have been deeply wounded —maybe
for life —because th e y have been played with! W e
u se food as a m eans to satisfy our hunger, we drink
w a te r to q u en ch o u r thirst, conscious of the fact
th a t th ese inan im ate objects are at our service; they
are th e re "for u s .” W a te r is not “loved" for itself; it
is a m eans to satisfy a need. B ut another hum an
being, as K an t has clearly expressed, should never
be u sed as a m ean s.157 B ecause of his dignity as a
p erso n , o n e’s p a rtn e r should be approached w ith
reverence. H e is n o t a tool; he is not a plaything
w h ich h ap p en s to give pleasure. For this reason
alone, w e can alre ad y un d erstan d the seriousness
o f th e sexual sphere.
M oreover, because sex is related to something not
only deep b u t intim ate, it implies a self-revelation; as
it is said in Genesis, "Adam knew Eve.” This is a
succinct b u t eloquent w ay of saying that, in the m u­
tual donation o f th e spouses, they "reveal” in a w ay
w hich is m atchless. This self-revelation can only take
place w ith G o d ’s express permission, for we belong
to H im . A t th e same time, it is a self-donation which
by its v e iy n atu re calls for a total commitment to an­
o th er person. O n e cannot give oneself to many p er­
sons sim ultaneously. O ne cannot "reveal” oneself to
m ore th a n one person: th e p erson w ith whom we are
b o und in the holy sacram ent o f matrimony.

93
B ecause o f its sacredness, because it is deep, b e­
cause th e sexual sphere belongs to G od in a special
way, its abuse is alw ays grave. To view th e sexual
sphere as “fun" is a desecration, an d its abuse (w hen
all conditions for sin are fulfilled: full consciousness
an d full willingness) constitutes a m ortal sin th at
radically separates us from G od. T h at desecration
becom es still clearer w h en w e recall th a t this sphere
is linked to p ro c re a tio n —this m ysterious collabora­
tion betw een th e spouses a n d G od in the creating o f
an o th er hu m an being. To sever love from its fru it­
fulness is to sow the seed th a t will ultim ately d e­
stroy it. It is n o t by accident th at m arriages w hich
practice artificial birth control are those th a t break
up m ost frequently.
People cannot live w ith o u t a m inim um o f food and
drink. True, some m ystics have survived on the H oly
Eucharist, b u t th ey w ere fed in a m iraculous fashion.
B ut it is a he to claim th at hum an beings become
crippled if th e y have no sexual life. Innum erable
saints o f b o th sexes have led celibate lives or taken
an d kept a vow o f virginity, bu t they all h ad radiant,
fulfilled personalities, an d often lived to a long, ripe
age. L et us imagine how ludicrous it w ould be if all
o f a sudden a y o u n g person w ho seem ed to enjoy a
bloom ing health d ropped dead; according to the laws
of certain states, an autopsy m ust be perform ed on

94
th e corpse. H o w ridiculous it w ould be if, after hours
o f careful dissection o f the dead person, the doctor
w ould declare virginity to be the cause o f h er de­
mise! E veiyone know s th a t this does not m ake sense.
B u t w e all know people w ho die y o u n g because they
have abused sex an d caught diseases th a t unforgiv­
ing n ature has linked to these aberrations.
W e have m entioned several tim es th at every sin
brings w ith it its ow n punishm ent. A p art from the
p o ssibility o f serious infections, lew d people will
n ever taste the tru e beauty o f a sexual union based
on m utual love an d lived in reverence. T hey certainly
have tasted th e poisonous violence of passion an d an
intensity o f pleasure w hich, as Plato w rote centuries
ago, nails the soul to the b o d y . B u t the sweetness
o f a m utual self-donation, accom plished in trem bling
rev eren ce, w ill n ev e r b e th e irs J 59 E sa u sold his
b irth rig h t for a m ess o f pottage. Such unfortunate
individuals place piggishness above love. J u s t as
F reu d devoted his life to the sexual sphere a n d never
u n d ersto o d its deeper m eaning, so the people w hose
god is sex will n ever experience its tru e m eaning and
beauty. Like A lberich in W a g n ers ring-cycle, they
w ill experience lust, b u t th e ir punishm ent is th a t
th ey will never taste the sw eetness o f tru e love.

MATERNI TY
W hereas few m en are called upon to becom e priests,
all w om en, w ith o u t exception, are called upon to be

95
m others. The saintly C ardinal M indzenty has w rit­
ten a book ab o u t m otherhood w h ic h —thanks to the
in sp iratio n a n d exam ple given him b y his holy
m o th e r—contains the m ost sublim e reflections ever
m ade ab o u t this topic. Indeed, “m aternity is G o d ’s
ten d ern ess. ”160 M a te rn ity is th e g re a t fem ale
charism w hich corresponds to the charism o f p riest­
hood g ran ted to some m en. G od has decided th at
these tw o charism s are n o t com patible.
In h e r b o o k The E ternal Woman, G e rtru d von le
F o rt w rites: “To be a m other, to feel m aternally,
m eans to tu rn especially to th e helpless, to incline
lovingly a n d h elp fu lly to ev ery sm all a n d w e ak
th in g u p o n th e e a rth .”161 T he diabolical w o rk th a t
h as ta k e n place since the legalization o f a b o rtio n is
th a t it has destroyed, in those trag ic w om en w ho
h ave allo w ed th e ir ch ild to be m u rd e re d , th e ir
sense for th e sacredness o f m aternity. A b o rtio n not
only m u rd ers th e innocent; it sp iritu ally m u rd ers
w om en. T hose w ho devote th e ir loving a tte n tio n to
these victim s o f o u r d ec ad en t society k n o w th a t th e
w o u n d created in th e ir souls is so deep th a t only
G o d 's g ra ce can h eal it. T he v e ry soul o f th e
w om an is m ean t to be m aternal. O n ce this sublim e
calling h as b een tram p led upon, such w om en b e ­
com e “u n sex e d ,” th e y are “sick u n to d e a th .” M a ­
te rn ity is a sublim e calling, a n d even th o u g h m an's
u n g ratefu l h e a rt often forgets his m o th e r’s suffer­
ings to b rin g him into th e w orld a n d h e r endless

96
d ev o tio n in o rd e r to b rin g him up, it is w ell-know n
th a t w h e n a m an faces d ea th on th e battlefield, his
la st w o rd s, his last th o u g h ts are often d irec ted to
his m other. D y in g soldiers scream , “M o th e r.”^

97
,
 PART IX

M a ry and the Female Sex

T h e p riv ileg e o f b e in g a w o m a n is p a rtic u la rly

h ig hlighted b y th e fact th a t M a r y —th e m ost p e r­
fect c reatu re —w as a w om an. E v e iy fem ale child is,
like th e H o ly V irgin, b o rn w ith a m ysterious veil
h id in g h e r fem inine organs. E v ery w o m an has a
w om b; a n d this is a privilege because it w as in a fe­
m ale w om b th a t th e S avior o f th e w o rld w as h id ­
den. E v ery w om an has b re asts a n d ev ery w om an
sh ould m editate u p o n the fact th a t th e K ing o f the
U niverse w as b re astfed b y th e holiest o f creatures.
E v ery m o th er b reastfeed in g h e r child is doing ex ­
actly w h a t to o k place in B ethlehem , E gypt, a n d
N a z a re th centuries ago. B ecause h e r fem ale n atu re
creates a deep b o n d b etw een w om an a n d th e H oly
V irgin, w om an are called u p o n to im itate M a ry ’s
v irtu es: first a n d forem ost, h e r ra d ia n t hum ility.
S ain t A u gustine tells us th a t he fo u n d som e a d ­
m irab le v irtu e s am o n g p a g a n s (let us th in k o f
S ocrates), b u t th a t never, absolutely never, drd he

99
find a p ag an w h o possessed th e v irtu e o f hum il­
ity.163 The reaso n is th a t this v irtu e is possible only
on th e su p ern atu ral plane; it is th ere fo re n o t acces­
sible to those w hose outlook is lim ited to n atu ra l
ethics. T he hum ble perso n dread s to be called hu m ­
ble, an d actually suffers w h en som eone praises him
for possessing this elusive virtue. T he p ro u d p e r­
son, on th e contrary, loves to h e a r his “hum ility”
com m ended a n d basks in this praise. As long as w e
com pare ourselves to o th er hu m an c re a tu re s—be it
for physical, intellectual, o r spiritual ch a rac te ris­
tic s —w e shall alw ays find som eone w h o is “w o rse ”
off th a n w e are. W e can easily console ourselves for
o u r lack o f talents b y poin tin g to som eone w ho is
m ore dep riv ed th a n w e are. W e all kn o w persons
w ho are ugly an d y e t w ho enjoy p oin tin g to the still
g re ater ugliness of som eone w hose “d o w ry ” is m ore
“an em ic” th a n theirs.
B u t hum ility refrains from m aking p u re ly h u m an
com parisons. T his v irtu e teaches us to place o u r­
selves n ak ed in fro n t o f o u r C reator, th e infinitely
perfect a n d H o ly O ne. Such a co n frontation m ust
b rin g us to o u r knees a n d force us to acknow ledge
th a t w e are “n o th in g b u t d u st a n d ashes” as A b ra ­
ham said w h en he begged G od to spare Sodom and
G om orrah. It is inconceivable th a t som eone should
stan d in fro n t o f th e one tru e G od a n d p ersist in the
illusion th a t he is “som ething.” All th e gifts w e p o s­
sess com e from G od; b y ourselves w e are nothing,

100
a n d w o u ld fall b ack into nothingness if G od’s h an d
d id n o t sustain u s in existence through the concurdud
divlnud (divine concurrence). This confrontation b e ­
tw een G od a n d m an could be crushing and lead us
to m etap h y sical d esp air (let us recall the cry o f
S ain t P eter: " D e p a rt from me, O Lord, for I am a
sinful m a n ”) .16'1* B u t th e recognition of our nothing­
ness sh ould go h a n d in hand w ith an aw areness
th a t G od, th e infinitely good and merciful G od,
loves his creatures, these poor beggars that H e has
k n ig h ted b y m aking them to His image and like­
ness. T he m om ent th a t m an perceives both his m is­
ery a n d his greatness, the conscrousness that he is
loved b rin g s him such overwhelm ing joy that, a p ­
propriately, he prefers to be nothing because th e
one w ho loves him a n d w hom he has learned to
love is ev ery th in g .155 A loving spouse rejoices in a c ­
k now ledging th e superiority of her spouse. W h at a
joy to contem plate th e perfections of the one w e
love. W h a t a jo y it is to sing a hym n of gratitude b e ­
cause this beau tiful being deigns to love us. All the
saints have fo u n d th e ir delight in declaring th eir
n o th in g n e ss a n d th e ir tr u s t th a t “He can m ake
g re at th in g s in u s.”
T his is th e first g re at lesson that M ary teaches
us, for h e r response to G o d ’s unfathomable gift is
th e M agnificat. U p o n receiving the message th a t
G od h a d chosen h e r as th e tabernacle in which His
D iv in e S o n w o u ld b e in carn ated , she expresses

101
surprise. T he favor offered h er w as som ething she
felt so u n w o rth y of. M oreover, she w as a virgin:
H o w can a virgin becom e a m other? B ut upon re ­
ceiving th e assurance th a t the H o ly S pirit w ould
cover her, she h um b ly declares h erself to be the
h andm aid of th e L ord, a n d actualizes the fem inine
charism o f receptivity b y saying: “be it done to me
according to T h y W o rd .” K now ing th a t this holy
p reg n an cy will cause concern to S aint Jo sep h , w ho
does n o t k n o w th e im m ense gift th a t his fiancee
has received, she p u ts all h e r tru s t in G od, know ing
th a t H e w ill p ro tec t th e h o n o r o f H is chosen one.
H e r faith is boundless. Later, she is to ld th a t h er
h e a rt w ill be p ierced b y a sw ord, a n d she is given a
p rem onition th a t she will have to share h e r S o n ’s
passion. H ere h er life echoes th e w o rd s o f L am en­
tatio n s 1:12, “O all y e th a t pass b y the way, attend,
and see if th ere be an y sorrow like to m y sorrow ,” or
o f th e C anticle o f C anticles, "D e p a rt from me, I will
w eep bitterly: lab o u r no t to com fort m e.” Always
again, she is prayerful, silent, recollected, loving,
seem ingly in th e b ac k g ro u n d a n d y e t gloriously in
th e foreground, th ro u g h h er m aternity.

She alone com bines tw o unique privileges given to

w om en: v irg in ity a n d m aternity. B y h e r virginity,
she testifies to h er to tal donation to h e r G od an d
creator. She k n o w s th a t the m ysterious g ard en o f

102
h e r w om b is to be k e p t u n to u ch ed b y m an, so th a t
n o t only is th e veil o f h e r virginity u n to rn before
she conceives C h rist b u t is k e p t so after H is birth;
fo r no one w as w o rth y to in h ab it in th e holy place
w h e re H e h ad fo un d a h u m an refuge d u rin g nine
m onths. W om en have to choose b etw een biological
m o th erh o o d a n d virginity. B oth callings are m ag­
nificent, b u t th ey are n o t com patible. J u s t as the
p riesth o o d a n d m atern ity can n o t be u n ite d in one
a n d th e sam e person, so G od has d ecided th a t bio ­
logical m o th erh o o d a n d virginity ca n n o t be united.
H e m ak es o ne u n iq u e ex c ep tio n : fo r th e sw eet
flow er o f N a zare th th a t H e has chosen to be the
m o th er o f H is Son. “T hou are blessed a n d v e n e ra ­
ble, o V irgin M aiy , w ho w ith o u t an y violation of
purity, w e rt fo u n d th e m o th er o f o u r Saviour. O
v irg in m o th er o f G od H e w hom th e w hole w o rld is
u n ab le to contain b eing m ade m an, enclosed H im ­
self in th y w o m b .”166

. .
B ut M ary's virginity a n d m otherhood also m anifest
th e im m ense spiritual fecundity o f virginity. The v ir­
gin w ho consecrates herself to G od in total donation
is n o t an d cannot rem ain barren. She, too, is called
to be called m other, b u t h er m otherhood is o f a spir­
itual nature, an d for this reason is open to the w orld.
A biological m other can, m exceptional cases, bring
tw enty-four children into the w orld (Saint C atherine

103
o f S ienna w as th e tw enty-fourth child of L apa). A
consecrated virgin is called upon to be the m oth er of
millions o f souls w hose sorrow s she carries in h er
h eart and to w hom she hopes to help give b irth in
eternal life. P aul Evdokim ov w rites: “La fem m e tient
avant tout ce charufme maternel d’e nfanter L Chr'ut daru
ameo deo hommeo” (“The special m aternal charism
is to give b irth to C hrist in m en's souls”) . 167

M a ry is th e one c reatu re w h o unconditionally ac­

cep ted h e r creatureliness w ith all its lim itations a n d
w eaknesses, w ith the tru s t th a t the L ord, w ho has
seen th e hum ility o f H is servant, w ould accom plish
g reat things in h e r soul. T hose w om en w ho have
rep eated ly b een deem ed “w e a k ” find in M a ry th eir
special title o f glory. H o w sw eet to b e w e ak w hen
one is c a rried b y th e all-loving a n d all-pow erful
G od w h o can do all things. T h at this “w e ak n ess,”
th is g e n tle n e ss a n d fra ilty (she is called in th e
litu rg y “th e m eekest o f th e m eek”) is tran sfig u red
b y grace is p ow erfully expressed in th e litu rg y in
w h ich th e sw eet flow er o f N a zare th is re ferred to
as “an arm y set in a rray .”168 M a ry m ust be “terrib le
as an arm y w ith b a n n e rs."169
“G o d h as n ever m ade o r form ed b u t one enm ity;
b u t it is an irreconcilable one: it is betw een M ary,
H is w o rth y m other, a n d th e devil; betw een th e chil­
d re n a n d servants o f the blessed v irgin a n d th e chil-

m
d re n a n d in stru m en ts o f Lucifer. S atan fears M a ry
n o t only m ore th a n all angels a n d m en, b u t in som e
sense m ore th a n G od Him self. It is not th a t the
anger, th e h atred , a n d th e p o w er o f G od are no t in ­
finitely g re ater th a n those o f th e Blessed Virgin, for
th e p erfections o f M a ry are lim ited; b u t it is b e ­
cause Satan, being p ro u d , suffers infinitely m ore
from b ein g b e a te n a n d p u n ish e d b y a little a n d
hum ble h an d m aid o f G od, a n d h e r hum ility hu m ­
bles him m ore th a n th e divine pow er. T he devils
fe a r one o f h e r sighs fo r a so u l m o re th a n th e
p ra y ers o f all th e saints, a n d one o f h e r m enaces
ag ain st th em m ore th a n all o th er to rm e n ts.”170
N o o th er h u m an being has b een given such a
pow er, because no o th e r h u m an bein g w as m ore
anxious to love a n d to serve. T he litu rg y has this
ad m ira b le p ra y er: “Adonai, Domine, Dead magne et
mirabilid, qul deduttl dalutem in m anu fem inae, exaudi
preced dervorum tuorum ” ( “O A d o n ai, L o rd G od,
g re at a n d w onderful, W h o d id st give salvation b y
th e h a n d o f a w om an; h e a r th e p ra y ers o f T h y ser­
v a n ts ”), th e S atu rd a y before th e F o u rth S u n d ay o f
Septem ber. T his w illingness to give everything a n d
to feel privileged in doing so explains w h y M a ry is
th e “one w h o refu tes all heresies.” F ath ers o f the
C h urch, D o cto rs o f th e C hurch, tru ly C atholic th e ­
ologians, are all called u p o n to defend C atholic o r­
thodoxy. B ut it is th e hum ble V irgin o f N a z a re th
w h o refu tes a ll the errord th a t th e enem y o f m an

105
keeps spreading, a n d som etim es, alas, th ro u g h the
v ery theologians, priests, a n d others w ho have the
special m ission o f defending revealed tru th . “B ut
w h a t a m ystery th a t poor, w e ak hum anity, inferior
to th e angels b y n ature, should be chosen to give to
th e angels th e ir king a n d th e ir q u e e n .”171 E v ery
w om an should trem ble w ith g ratitu d e w h e n re a d ­
ing th ese w o rd s w h ich highlight so pow erfully the
dignity that, th ro u g h M ary, th e y have been given in
th e econom y o f redem ption.

T he perfu m e o f M a ry ’s p u rity has a ttra cted in n u ­

m erable souls, anxious to offer to G od th e “rich
w o rth o f y o u r virginity.”172 She has revealed to the
“w e ak sex” th e g reatness a n d sublim ity o f fem inin­
ity. In th e light of w h a t has been said, one m ust
m arvel at th e fact th a t th e fem inists have succeeded
in co n v in cin g so m an y w o m en th a t th e R o m an
C atholic C h u rc h is sexist a n d looks do w n u p o n
them . In fact, th e co n tra ry is tru e. S he has exalted
th e statu s o f w om en in a unique fashion, a n d the
fact th a t th e y have no “p o w e r” in th e C h u rch is
o nce again a sign o f G o d ’s special love fo r th e
“w e a k ” sex. It is safer to obey th a n to com m and,
a n d th e one tru ly w o rth y to be a leader is n o t only
th e one w h o has learn ed to obey, b u t th e one w ho
m uch p refers to do so, a n d only re lu c ta n tly —u n d e r
th e cross —accepts to give orders. This is a tru th

106
th a t has b een constantly repeated by the Church.
R om ano G u ard in i w rites: “Christianity has always
placed th e life struggling for inner truth and ulti­
m ate love above th a t in ten t on exterior action, even
th e m ost courageous an d excellent. It has always
v alu ed silence m ore highly than words, purity of in­
te n t m ore th a n success, the magnanimity of love
m ore th a n the effect o f labor.”175 The greatest vic­
to ry w as achieved a t C alvary at the very moment of
w h a t seem ed to be the ultim ate defeat, with the
d eath of th e O n e w ho w as obedient unto death.
A sm all story: M a n y y ea rs ago, a young Jew ish
m an, a stu d e n t o f m y husband, found his w ay to
th e C h u rch . H e becam e a C arthusian monk and
after having received his form ation at the G rande
C h artre u se a n d having sp en t some time in E n g ­
land, he w as sen t to th e U nited States to the first
C arth u sian m o n astery in this country. H e becam e
p rio r an d w as reelected a n d reelected every single
tim e th e m onks voted, fo r some twenty-five years.
O n e day, I recerved a letter from him, inform ing
me t h a t —a fte r having atten d e d a m eeting at the
G ra n d e C h a rtre u s e —it w as decided unanim ously
th a t w h e n a su p erio r h a d reach ed a certain age an d
h a d ex e rc ise d th e ch a rg e o f su p erio r for m an y
y ears, he sh o u ld n o t be reelected. He ended this
b rie f n o te b y saying: “Finally, I can once again be a
real C arth u sian a n d obey.” This is the victory o f
th e su p ern atu ral.

107
 It is ap p ro p riate to end this sh o rt w o rk dedicated
to the b eau ty of fem ininity b y rem arking th a t pagan
a rt in various countries has honored the male geni­
tals and developed a phallic cult still visible to d ay in
m onum ents and sculptures. T he m om ent the C hu rch
g ain ed ascen d en cy , she w a g e d a re le n tle ss w a r
against this aberration. B ut S he has in tro d u ced a
prayer, rep eated millions o f times every single day
for centuries, in w h ich th e female organ par excel­
lence—th e w o m b —is exalted: “Blessed is the fruit o f
th y W om b, J e s u s .”
Indeed, it is a privilege to b e a w om an.

108
 Referenced

1 See: Edith Stein, Paris: Editions du Seuil, pp. 95, 101.

2 Population Research Institute, Front Royal, VA.
Tel. 540-622-5240.
3 Sirach 7:27; Isaiah 13:18; Ezra 30:16.
4 Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex (New York: Al­
fred Knopf, 1993), p. 140.
5 Ibi2., p . 51.
6 Ibid., p . 456.
7 Ibid., p . 518.
8 G. K. Chesterton, What u) Wrong with the World (New
York: Sheed and Ward, 1956), p. 197.
9 de Beauvoir, op. cit., p. 105.
10 G. K. Chesterton, quoted in “Woman and the Phi­
losophers,” Chesterton Review, XI. 1, February
1985, Saskatchewan, Canada, p. 20.
11 Sigmund Freud, quoted in de Beauvoir, op. cit., p. 46.
12 Aristotle, The Generation ofAninwb, IV-2. 766 b—33.
13 Sirach 25:14.
14 Sirach 25:15.
15 Sirach 25:23.
16 Sirach 26:7.
17 Sirach 42:14.
18 Ecclesiastes 7:28.

109
 19 Sirach 42:14.
20 Yerushalmi, Sotah 3-^4.
21 Quoted in Buytendyk, ibid., La Femme (Paris: Des-
clee de Brouwer, 1954), p. 66.
22 M artin Luther, Works. 12.94 and 20.84 (Germany:
Weimer Press, 1883).
23 William Shakespeare, Hamlet: Prince of Denmark; Act
I, Scene 2.
24 Quoted in Buytendyk, op. cit., p. 74.
25 Ibid., p . 70.
26 Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra (Stutt­
gart: Alfred Kroener Verlag, 1988), Band 75—91, p.
71.
27 Selectionsfrom Schopenhauer (New York: Charles
Scribner, Modem Student’s Library, 1928) p. 435.
28 Ibid., p . 44 1.
29 Quoted in Norbert Guterman, A Book ofFrench Quota­
tions (New York: Doubleday Anchor, 1990), p. 327.
30 Andre Maurois, Ariel ou la Vie de Shelley (Paris: B.
Grasset, 1946), p. 213.
31 Quoted in Buytendyk, op. cit., p. 73.
32 Proverbs 31:10.
33 Sirach 7:19.
34 See: Schiller, Wuerdeder Frauen (Dignity of Women).
35 In Buytendyk, op. cit., p. 279.
36 de Beauvoir, op. cit., p. 229.
3 7 Ibid., p p . 55, 112.
38 Ibid., p. 55.
39 Tatiana Goricheva, Talking About God is Dangerous
(New York: Cross Road, 1988), p. 86—87.
40 Sdren Kierkegaard, Works of Lose (New York: H ar­
per Torchbooks, 1951), p. 139.
41 Chesterton, What is Wrong with the World? op. cit., p.
148.

110
42 Quoted in Guterman, op. cit., p. 151.
43 Sdren Kierkegaard, Either-Or, (written under the
pseudonym of Victor Eremita) (Princeton, N J:
Princeton University Press, 1946), p. ii, 77.
44 Friedrich Nietzsche, MetuchLLched, allzu Meruchlicheo,
Ibi2., I.II, 265.
45 Friedrich Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, ibid., Band 77,
p . 344.
46 Kierkegaard, Either-Or, p. ii, 260-61. It is noteworthy
that Free Masonry encouraged and furthered the
feminist revolution. See: Pierre Virion, Myoteriwn Ini-
quitatL) (Rennes, France: Editions Saint Michel,
1967), p . 141.
47 de Beauvoir, op. cit., p. 97.
48 Ibi2., p . 172.
4 9 Ibid., p . 171.
50 Luke 2:7.
51 Philippians 2:10.
52 Luke 2:11.
53 M atthew 2:11.
54 Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Volume V (Westmin­
ster, M D: The Newman Press, 1949), p. 172.
55 Glimpoed of the Church Fathers, edited by Claire Rus­
sell (London: Scepter, 1996), p. 506.
56 Kierkegaard, op. cit., p. ii, 174.
57 Luke 23:26.
58 Isaiah 53:5.
59 M y husband used to remark that many of the most
fanatical Nazis were recruited among extremely
mediocre individuals who, upon discovering that
they were “blond beasts,” suddenly put on airs, and
claimed superiority over very talented individuals
who did not enjoy the “privilege” of belonging to
the Nordic race.

I ll
 60 See: First Things (November 1999):In a letter to the
editor, Robert Alpert excoriates Pius XII for his
“silence during World W ar II. According to the
author, this great pope should have preferred
reprisals against Christians rather than keeping a
cowardly silence. He writes: “It is central to Chris­
tian belief as I understand it, that the time of trial
may come when we must risk and if need be offer
our lives” (p. 12). Pius X II had already denounced
anti-Semitism in 1938 in M it Brennender Sorge. Con­
tinued re-denunciation could have magnified the
horror, not only by increasing Hitler's hatred of the
chosen people, but also by meaninglessly sacrific­
ing innumerable Christians. The Pope could not
command martyrdom, as he said to my husband in
a private audience in Jan u aiy 1936. According to
Mr. Alpert, Pius XII should have “forced” German
Catholics to martyrdom. This heroic death must be
freely chosen. A true Christian does not judge the
intentions of others, does not excoriate them for not
being “heroic.” He should pray for the grace to be
heroic himself when the situation calls for m artyr­
dom. The words of Christ, “Do not judge and you
shall not be judged," apply in this case.
61 Sbren Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript
(Princeton, N J: Princeton University Press, 1992),
p . 386.
62 See: Wisdom 2:16 and 2:21. Peter Singers appoint­
ment as professor of bioethics at Princeton Univer­
sity—the apostle of “animals' rights" and basically of
the equality of men and animals —eloquently illus­
trates this tendency toward moral blindness.
63 Wisdom 1:12.

112
64 See: Dietrich von Hildebrand, The Trojan Horde in the
City of God (Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press,
1999).
65 I Corinthians 1:19.
66 Dietrich von Hildebrand, op. cit., challenges the con­
cept of “modern man,” pp. 153—154.
67 Quoted in Paul Evdokimov, La Femme et le Salut da
Monde (Paris: Casterman, 1958), p. 162.
68 Louis Fisher, The Life of Mahatma Ghandi (New
York: H arper Collins, 1983), p. 179.
69 Ibid., p . 427.
70 Michael Scammell, Solzhenitdyn (New York: W. W.
Norton Co., 1984), p. 726.
71 Joan Haslip, Catherine the Great (New York: Putnam,
1976), p . 170.
72 Isolde Kurz, Der Meidter von San Francedco, p. 70.
73 F. W. Foerster, Erlebte WeLtgedchichte (Niirnberg:
Glock und Lutz, 1953), p. 444.
74 Pearl Buck, M y Several Worldd (New York: Jo h n
Day, 1957), p. 152.
75 Pearl Buck, The Dragon Seed (New York: John Day,
1941), p . 95.
76 Ibid., p . 232.
77 Albert Speer, Indide the Third Reich (New York: Mac­
Millan, 1970), p. 146.
78 Kierkegaard. Either-Or, ii, p. 56.
79 Ibid., p. 260-261.
80 Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, ibid., Band 76, p. 167.
81 Nietzsche, Die Undchutdded Werderu, ibid., Band 82,
p. 311.
82 Gabriel Marcel, Homo Viator: Proleyomened a une Meta-
phydiquede I’Edperance (Paris: Aubier, 1947), p. 175.
83 M atthew 20:28.
84 Saint Teresa of Avila, Vie de Sainte Terede (Paris:
Julien Lanier, 1852), Chapter XL, p. 607.

113
 85 Ratisbonne, Saint Bernard of CLairvaux ('Rockford,
IL: Tan, 1991), p. 222-223.
86 2 Peter 3:10.
87 de Beauvoir, op. cit., p. 456.
88 1 Peter 3:7.
89 See: D. von Hildebrand’s Man and Woman
(Chicago, IL: Franciscan Herald Press, 1966), p.
63.
90 Paul Evdokimov, La Femme et le Salat da Monde
(Paris: Casterman, 1958), p. 159.
91 Dom Raymond Thibaut, Abbot Columba Marmion
(St. Louis, MS: H erder Book Co., 1961), p. 231.
92 Ibid., p . 607.
93 Goethe, Faudt, Part I, Verse 3585.
94 II Corinthians 12:10.
95 Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Volume 4 (Westmin­
ster, M D: The Newman Press, 1949), p. 246.
96 W hy are we so moved at the sight of babies? A
“normal” human being is deeply touched by the
weakness of a newborn whose survival depends
upon the constant care of others. Their weakness is
a call to handle them with infinite gentleness and
tenderness. It is one of the most disastrous conse­
quences of abortion that many are those in our so­
ciety today who have extinguished in their sick
hearts this tender love for the most helpless of crea­
tures: the baby in the womb. The harm that the
practice of abortion has done to the human heart is
inestimable. We could define abortionists and those
blind to the horror of abortion as “those who have
no heart,” no tenderness toward the weak.
97 Saint Augustine, Confedoiono, Book VIII, 12.
98 Psalm 118:71.
99 Virgil, Aeneid, I, 462.

114
100 Trcdentine Missal, September 15.
101 See: Dietrich von Hildebrand, The Heart (Chicago,
IL: Franciscan Herald Press, 1965), Chapter IV.
102 Blaise Pascal, Pensees texte de Leon Brunschvicg; intro­
duction par Emile Faguet (Paris: Nelson, 1949)-, p. 277.
103 Ibid., p . 267.
104 Ibid., p . 272.
105 Chesterton, ibid., p. 163.
106 Sdren Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript
(Princeton, N J: Princeton University Press, 1941),
p. 268.
107 Chesterton, What is Wrong with the World, p. 113.
108 Esther 5.
109 Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Volume 4,
p . 267.
110 Genesis 6.
111 Ratisbonne, op. cit., p. 105.
112 Quoted ibid., p. 105.
113 Sdren Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling and Sickness
unto Death, Appendix (Garden City, N J: Double­
day Anchor, 1954), p. 215.
114 I Corinthians 1:25.
115 II Corinthians 2:30.
116 II Corinthians 7:5
117 Saint Augustine, Confessions VI, 8.
118 Saint Augustine, Contra Letteras Petiliani m II.
Quoted in Gueranger, Volume V p- 10.
119 The Story of a Soul, French Edition: Carmel de
Lisieux, 1957, p. 163.
120 I Peter 5:6.
121 Chesterton, What is Wrong with the World, p. 144.
122 Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations (Boston, MA: Little,
Brown and Co., 1947), p. 877.
123 I Corinthians 4:7.

115
124 S^ren Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling and Sickness
unto Death, (Garden City, N J: Doubleday, 1954), p.
205.
125 Gertrud von le Fort, The Eternal Woman, The Woman
in Time [and] Tuneless Woman (Milwaukee: Bruce
Publishing Co., 1962), p. 51.
126 On a purely secular plane, it is noteworthy that
Descartes chose to write his famous Discourse on the
Method in French and not in Latin, so that this
work would be accessible to women whose minds
are less cluttered by theories and preformed ideas,
that is, because they are more receptive.
127 D. von Hildebrand, The Heart (Chicago, IL: Fran­
ciscan Herald Press, 1977), 2, pp. 47, 75.
128 Ibid., p. 50.
129 In this context, we cannot address the interesting
question whether pleasures and pains as experi­
enced by persons differ widely from the same feel­
ings experienced by animals, because for m an—a
person—suffering has meaning, whereas, to use the
profound words of Dante, animals do not know the
“why": "...e lo 'mperche non sanno.” (Divine Comedy,
"Purgatory," Canto iii, verse 84).
130 D. von Hildebrand, op. at., p. 52 ff.
131 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Garden City, N J:
Image Book, 1959), p. 55.
132 See: Saint Augustine, De Doctrina Christiana, 1—27.
133 Plato, L a m II, 653.
134 Dietrich von Hildebrand, Christian Ethics, (New
York: D. McKay Co., 1953), Chapter 25.
135 The Journals o f Kierkegaard, translated by Alexander
Dru (New York: Harper, 1958), p. 215.
136 Ivan Goncharov, Oblomov (New York: Dutton,
1960), p. 204.
137 Ezekiel 11:19 and 36:26.

116
138 Proverbs 23:26.
139 Jerem iah 17:9.
140 Saint Terese of Avila, ibid., Chapter XXVII.
141 There is no doubt that Dietrich von Hildebrand is
one of the great champions of the role and impor­
tance of affectivity in human and religious life. It is
noteworthy, however, that he is also the person
who has analyzed the dangers that illegitimate feel­
ines plav in our lives. See: Transformation, in Christ,
p p . 255, 339.
142 Litany of the Soared Heart.
143 Ratisbonne, op. cit., p. 225.
144 Canticle of Canticles 2:5.
145 Saint Bonaventure, The Mind’s Road to God, Part 1
(New York: The Library of Liberal Arts, 1953), p. 8.
146 Thessalonians 5:17.
147 See also: D. von Hildebrand, Transformation in Christ,
“Recollection and Contemplation,” Chapter VI.
148 Canticle of Canticles 4:12.
149 Saint Augustine, On Virginity, X, 10 (Paris: Des-
clee de Brouwer, 1939), III, p. 213.
150 Shakespeare, A Midsummer N ights Dream, Act II,
Scene 1.
151 Psalms 113.
152 M atthew 21:31.
153 Chesterton, op. cit., p. 192.
154 Ibid, Chapter I, p. 3 PP.
155 Quote Congressional Record, Volume 113 (1967), pp.
28848-28849.
156 See: Dietrich von Hildebrand’s Purity (Steubenville,
OH: Franciscan University of Steubenville Press,
1995), Chapter 1, p. 3.
157 Immanuel Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Meta­
physic of Morals (New York: The Library of Liberal
Arts, 1949), p. 46.

117
158 Plato, Phaedo, xxxiii, p. 83.
159 Saint Augustine, Confessions I, 12.
160 Evdokimov, op. cit., p. 162.
161 Von le Fort, op. cit., p. 78.
162 Cf. Gereon Goldman, On the Shadow of Hid Wings
(San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1999), pp. 104-105.
Also: Eugenio Corti, The Red Horse (San Francisco:
Ignatius Press, 2000), p. 255,
163 Saint Augustine, Commentary on the Psalms (Psalm
31), Volume II (New York: Newman Press, 1961),
p. 87.
164 Luke 5:8.
165 Pascal, Pense'es texte de Leon Brunschvicg; introduction
par Emile Fagnet (Paris: Nelson, 1949), p. 416.
166 Litany of the Blessed Virgin.
167 Evdokimov, op. cit., p. 220.
168 Canticle of Canticles 6:3.
169 Canticle of Canticles 6:4.
170 Gueranger, op. cit., p. 205.
171 Ibid, p. 169.
172 Shakespeare, A Midsummer N ight’s Dream, Act II,
Scene 1.
173 Romano Guardini, The Lord (Chicago, IL: Regency,
1954), P. 194.

118