Rambler Vol. 10, No.6

rambler the

Veritas Ensis Noster.

Hats off to the Seniors May 7, 2013- Vol. 10, No. 6

In This Issue...

Rambler: Pronunciation: \ram-blər\ Function: noun Date: c. 2002 1. A student organization determined to present truth and withhold nothing, discussing a variety of subjects such as administration, morality, literature, politics, and faith.

the rambler

An Independent Student Journal Christendom College Veritas Ensis Noster

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Matthew F. Naham, K.T. Brizek BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Charles J. Rollino; Peter J. Spiering LAYOUT EDITOR Theresa R. Lamirande NEWS & POLITICS EDITOR Colleen A. Harmon SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR Thomas A. Ferrara FAITH & REASON EDITOR K.T. Brizek ARTS & CULTURE EDITOR Theresa R. Lamirande

News & Politics

Feature

5 BLADES OF GLORY

8 HERE’S TO THE SENIORS

by Peter Foeckler

by Theresa Lamirande

Opinion

The Last Word

6 TO DEBATE OR NOT TO DEBATE

15 THANKS, TEACH

by Monica Davis

by The Editorial Staff

7 “THE RULES” AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES

by Joe Brizek

Faith & Reason

FRONT COVER Hats off to the Seniors

10 PATIENCE: THE PATH TO PEACE

by Maria Bonvissuto

11 THE WORTH OF WORDS

by Peter Deucher

12 INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE CONTROVERSY FACULTY ADVISOR Dr. Patrick Keats COPY EDITOR Katie R. Wunderlich CONTRIBUTORS Maria Bonvissuto, Joe Brizek, Monica Davis, Peter Deucher, Lauren Enk, Peter Foeckler, and Christopher Roberts

by Christopher Roberts

Arts & Culture 13 L’ENFER C’EST LES AUTRES

by Lauren Enk

14 THE MOM WHO KNEW TOO MUCH

by Lauren Enk

Our Mission Statement

The Rambler and its staff are dedicated to training the next generation of Catholic journalists and intellectuals. We prize the liberal arts education received from Christendom College and write about the news, arts, culture, faith, and reason from this gained perspective. We believe we will play an essential part in a renaissance of new leaders, journalists, and communicators for the 21st century.

2 | two

To Contact The Rambler:

134 Christendom Drive Front Royal, VA 22630 E-mail: rambler.editor@gmail.com Web: www.therambleronline.org Follow The Rambler on Facebook!

Subscribe:

COLLEGIATE-NETWORK

An eight issue subscription to The Rambler may be obtained through a donation of $25 or more. All contributions go to support The Rambler.

Editor’s Corner

Dear Readers,

As the school year draws to a close, we’re all faced with many, difficult good-byes. Especially for our dear seniors, leaving us in less than a week, it’s a season of lasts. The Rambler is in a similar situation.

For several of our staff members, this will be their last issue. It’s the last issue our dear layout editor, Theresa Lamirande, will design, and the last issue for contributors who are graduating as well. This is the last issue of the year and for some, such as my predecessor, Matthew Naham, these nostalgic Lasts belong even to the previous issue.

Yet, while there are a great number of things, feelings, seasons and friends that we will miss, we have to detect the hopeful side of so many Lasts. Because when you’re faced with Lasts, that means soon you’ll come across a whole, new gamut of Firsts. I’m exhilarated to be coordinating my first Rambler as editor-in-chief. I’m equally ecstatic to introduce the new staff, who will be working with me next semester in bringing campus the quality of peer literature our readers have come to expect. I hope we are able to meet and even exceed the high standards I know you have for us. A fond farewell to all the seniors, and to all our readers over the summer.

May the road rise to meet you,

K.

. Brizek

T

Editor-in-Chief

3 | three

News Briefs

On April 28th, “The Coward,” a silent film directed by Junior Joe Duca, premiered at the Front Royal Movie Theater at 4:00 p.m. The film, which was directed, produced and acted entirely by Christendom students in the College’s Film Club, drew a solid crowd and impressed the audience.

On April 13th, the Vatican announced the creation of a new panel of cardinals selected by Pope Francis to assist him in Church government and reform of the Roman Curia. Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston was one of the eight cardinals appointed to the committee. The group will hold its first official meeting in October of 2013.

A recent Washington Post poll shows that Virginia Attorney and Republican, Ken Cuccinelli II, has a slight lead over the Democratic candidate, Terry McAuliffe, in the Virginia gubernatorial election.

Cuccinelli visited Christendom as a major guest speaker in the spring of 2012. The election is still six months off, and a lot could happen between now and then, but it’s good news just the same.

Jury hearings in the trial of abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell began on April 30th. Gosnell was officially charged with the murder of four babies after birth and the overdose of a patient. Indignation and controversy has surrounded not only the horrendous practices of this abortionist, but also the lack of national media coverage of his crimes and trial. The jury, after three days of deliberation ending on Friday, May 3rd, was unable to reach a verdict. The trial continues.

On May 3rd and 5th, Israel launched two air strikes on the nation of Syria, bombing the Damascus International Airport on Friday and a military research center outside of Damascus early Sunday. The attacks targeted supplies of missiles that were supposedly on their way to Hezbollah, a militant group that has had a history of armed conflict with Israel. The Syrian government has issued a statement strongly condemning Israel’s actions, but whether Syria will take stronger retaliatory measures in the future remains to be seen.

4 | four

The Chester-Belloc Debate Society ended the year in a strong fashion with its final debate on Sunday, April 28th. The Society debated the resolution: “Receiving Communion on the hand is intrinsically less reverent than receiving on the tongue.” The controversial topic brought out a large audience, and pro won in a landslide victory.

News & Politics

BLADES OF GLORY:

A New Sports Team at Christendom by

Peter Foeckler, ‘15

D

o you like ice? Then hold onto your snow pants: things are about to get chilly. Coach Chris VanderWoude recently announced the Athletic Department’s plan to incorporate the ever-widening interests of the student body here at Christendom by introducing men’s figure skating as a new intercollegiate varsity sport.

Coach VanderWoude believes the team will be a valuable asset to the college, offering a never-before-available opportunity for students to compete in this unique sport: “It will give students with different interests the chance to get involved in the athletics program, it will boost the school’s recognition in the intercollegiate sports community, and it will be a fantastic opportunity for offseason training for other athletes.

It is a win-win-win situation.” So much win.

The decision to add a new sports team has been in consideration for a long time, VanderWoude admitted in an exclusive interview with local radio station 90.3 WXDM. He explained that the Athletic Department for years has been toying with the idea of a new team, considering everything from ping-pong to yak racing, but it was not until last fall that they finally narrowed it down to football, lacrosse, and figure skating. Josh Petersen, director of Special Operations for the college, described the deliberation process: “Figure skating was clearly the best choice, right from the start. Still, it took some convincing because some people were blinded by mindless prejudice and did not keep their hearts open. They were interested only in brutish, contact sports that would do nothing but build character, camaraderie, and school spirit. They never considered the loveliness that figure skating would bring.”

Petersen, a two-time United States Figure Skating Champion, was a major supporter of the figure skating initiative. His enthusiastic campaigning to bring a “breath of fresh ice,” as he called it, to the campus helped decide the vote. He was aided in this endeavor by student and fellow skating aficionado, Daniel Mitchell. Mitchell, a baseball player in his spare time, grew up in Pennsylvania near an ice rink where he admits he “burned up the ice” regularly as a child. Skating was a major part of his life all through high school, but after coming to Christendom, he lost that outlet and, it seemed to him, a part of his soul with it: “I feel that I have never lived up to my true potential here at Christendom without the opportunity to do what I truly love and to express myself through figure skating. Thankfully, that will all change with this fantastic new initiative on the part of the Athletic Department.”

Not everyone was so enthusiastic, however. Football and lacrosse both had significant backing, supported by students just as passionate about their sports as Mr. Mitchell. Peter Romanchuk, a high school lacrosse phenom, opposed the figure skating idea, speaking his mind in no uncertain terms: “Figure skating is for women. Deal with it. Rar.” A number of people shared Mr. Romanchuk’s views, but the majority of them were able to reconcile with the ultimate decision in favor of figure skating. Bobby Crnkovich, an All-American high school

quarterback who converted to rugby after arriving at Christendom, came to terms with the announcement of a men’s figure skating team and even learned to embrace the idea as a good opportunity for offseason training for rugby:

“

I was skeptical at first because I didn’t even know men could figure skate, but after Coach [VanderWoude] explained the benefits which figure skating could have for rugby players, including improved balance and outrageous foot muscles, I was sold.

”

Crnkovich even described plans to involve the whole rugby team in the figure skating program, which would peak in the winter, in preparation for the rugby season in the spring. “We could do a special rugby team routine: Imagine twenty large men zipping around the ice in perfect harmony, wearing matching Christendom tights. It would be better than Mystery Dinner Theater! It would be great for teambuilding, too.” When asked if he would shave his beard for skating competitions, Crnkovich declined to comment.

On the topic of figure skating over football and lacrosse, Coach VanderWoude explained the thought process of the Advisory Board which made the ultimate decision: “Objectively, figure skating is a less dangerous sport than both football and lacrosse, meaning lower insurance costs for the school. Also, the equipment is cheaper because ice skating does not require any pads, helmets, and such like the other two sports. We won’t even have to pay for jerseys due to plans for a girls’ sewing club that will make outfits for the guys. And to top it all off, we won’t have to rent a rink because we can just hold competitions down at the dock when the river freezes over. Football and lacrosse would be much more expensive and figure skating just seems to be the more prudent choice for us at the moment.” Plans are already underway for bleachers to be installed on the riverside to accommodate the multitude of fans who are expected. There will also be a small shed to house the judges’ platform and rink walls during the warm months. A Zamboni will be rented out for the events, and Stephen Treacy has agreed to open a branch of The Snack Shack down at the river in anticipation of the crowds. He has also agreed to be on hand for first aid in case of emergencies, such as skaters falling through the ice or judges getting frostbite.

The team itself is looking promising as well. Josh Petersen has accepted the position of head coach, and with top prospects like Mitchell, as well as enthusiastic newcomers such as Crnkovich and the rugby team, Christendom’s first men’s figure skating team is bound to be a strong one. In the words of Mr. Romanchuk, who has since softened his views on the subject and is already developing a killer skating and juggling routine, “Lookit. We gon’ be dece.” So be sure to come out next winter and support your Christendom Crusaders On Ice! 5 | five

Opinion

To Debate or Not to Debate:

An Outsider Examines the Chester-Belloc Debate Society

“ by

Monica Davis, ‘13

”

Delightfully treasonous and wonderfully seditious.

T

his is how John Connolly describes the Chester-Belloc Debate Society on their very own website. He goes on to say, “Everything that makes up Christendom College is good. But everything that is good must be questioned.” Very true, Mr. Connolly. One of these good things just begging to be questioned, is the infamous Debate Society itself. Home of the intellectual elite, the Debate Society was formed to promote a development of rhetoric and public presentation through the rational exchange of ideas. But does the Debate Society still achieve any of these ends? That question is up for debate, no pun intended.

In recent times, the Debate Society has enjoyed high regard only from its members. The view from outside the circle of the sacred elected few looks very different. While the Society is enjoying their pomp and ceremony, the student body sees a group of people becoming increasingly alienated from their classmates, stuck in the same intellectual ruts without developing as speakers, and catering to a select demographic which, should you not happen to be a philosophically and theologically inclined political blow-hard, looks down upon your unwashed attempts at intellectualism with a condescendingly helpful hand.

Many students feel that the Debate Society is not a welcoming institution and is a class apart, far above the mundane realities of everyday life. From exclusive “Duma Dinners” in the public Commons, to the impenetrable secret fortress that constitutes Duma events outside the actual debates, the Debate Society looks more like a cult than a way to develop as a rational person. What rational person would want to voluntarily sell their soul to what essentially amounts to a wanna-besecret society? The ridiculous rites and rituals accompanying those parts of the Society’s activities that we are deemed worthy to view do not help this mysterious public image. I’m not saying it’s the cape, but it’s the cape. These things wouldn’t be so weirdly disturbing if the Society didn’t take them quite so weirdly seriously. Everyone likes to dress up and indulge his sense of drama now and again, but it doesn’t have to be made into sacred dress-up. Some things in this world are sacred. Some things are just nerdy: it’s important to know the difference.

As a concept, the Debate Society is wonderful. No one would disagree that liberal arts students, or any students really, should develop their public speaking skills and learn to express themselves with brevity and charm. However, the Debate Society has drifted far from their goal.

From outside the sacred circle, members do not seem like they become any better logicians after joining the Debate Society than they were before. They gain experience, but experience must not be mistaken for

6 | six

prowess. Commonly, debates end nearly on the same points with which they began, the only difference being that these points have now been dragged through intellectual back alleys and beaten within an inch of their re-phrasability three hours later. Thank goodness for the gracious members of the Debate Society, kindly volunteering to lead us, the unwashed, ignorant masses, out of Plato’s cave! Almost no one is ever dissuaded from their earlier positions, the only achievement being the tentative conviction of those few in the audience who might have come without any real opinion.

To be honest, the only real draw of the debates is the staggering amount of alcohol the Society manages to serve without charge. Many people attend debates only for one reason: the booze. That clearly shows a disconnect somewhere along the line. If there is no intellectual attraction, then the Debate Society isn’t doing its job. Granted, not everyone will want to participate in every debate, or even in any debate, but if the Debate Society cannot attract people based on the richness of its propositions, then it is failing to provide the intellectual breeding ground for which it was intended.

The last big problem the Debate Society faces arises from its exclusivity. And before the Duma get their capes in a twist, let me clarify.

I am not talking about their super-secret inductions or their super-secret parties or their super-secret meetings or their super-secret elections or their super-secret office of the Prefect of Secret Rites. I’m talking about the exclusivity of the types of people to which the Society caters to in their propositions. The Debate Society rarely deems topics of general interest to be worthy of attention. Some of the past propositions have been, “St. Patrick’s Battalion ought to have been hanged like the vile and filthy traitors they were,” “Hume’s guillotine beheads moral theology,” and, “Christians and Jews worship the same God.” They vary from obscure to unintelligible to irrelevant. Only occasionally has the Debate Society offered propositions catering to the average Christendom student, as opposed to a doctoral candidate that happens to be steeped in obscure facts and data.

The Chester-Belloc Debate Society could be a wonderful resource for students trying to take their Catholicism out into the vicious world of argument that, oftentimes, is not very rational. As it is now, it is little better than a burden on its members and on the students foolish enough to think a debate will be worth attending. I challenge the Debate Society to truly reach out to the student body, without condescension and intellectual snobbery. I challenge the Debate Society to encourage real formation in the art of speaking. I challenge the Debate Society to foster true development of its members and to honestly examine its own faults in all their entirety. Perhaps the next proposition should be, “The Debate Society serves the Christendom community.”

Opinion

“The Rules” And Their Consequences by

Joe Brizek, ‘14

M

any people are under the misapprehension that you cannot While most students tend to be fairly good about finding designated critique something you like. If you point out a problem with drivers, the fact that there is driving involved at all enters unnecessary a movie, these people immediately assume that you dislike risk into the equation. Worse still is how this policy handcuffs RAs. it. Yet I do not stop appreciating steak if a waiter gives me one which is It’s a peculiar phenomenon whereby the school discerns twenty or so a little undercooked. I merely point out that it’s undercooked because men and women as being leaders among their peers, only to promptly I’m a fan of steak, and I want to have the best steak possible. I have a render them anathema to those peers in any but the worst situations similar attitude toward Christendom, particularly regarding a number involving alcohol. Yet despite these difficulties, I can certainly appreciate of its rules and regulations. However, rather than simply talking about the school’s position on this issue. It would be very difficult for the the rules I like or dislike, I also want to address how successful they administration to soften its stance without running into other, larger are. As with any organization, the Christendom collective has a certain problems. The best compromise seems to be having a rule against pretension with its policies. It is my ambition to assess the goals of some alcohol which is only leniently enforced. To what degree this is already of these policies with a view toward a few of their counter-intuitive the case, I will leave up to the reader’s discretion. results.

Finally, the compulsory nature of class attendance is

Perhaps the school’s most contentious policy is that of curfew. something which frequently draws the ire of students. Yes, education The student handbook describes the aim of this policy: “The curfew at is expensive, but so are televisions, and purchasing one of those doesn’t Christendom is designed to assist students in the development of regular oblige you to watch Seinfeld every morning (although it is part of the habits of living, to foster effective study patterns, and to give a balanced pop culture core curriculum). Yet the student handbook waxes: “Since structure and rhythm to student life on campus.” Yet observation shows the interaction of students and professor in the classroom is an essential that the actual results are mixed. The livelier underclassmen are at least feature of the educational program at Christendom College, all students obliged to make an appearance at the dorms around curfew, but this are expected to attend all classes.” While I think most people can agree tends to be viewed as more of a temporary inconvenience than anything that interaction with teachers is an essential feature of almost any else. Furthermore, for the rest of the underclassman it incentivizes educational program, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to use the staying awake. Why would Johnny Freshman ever go to bed at eleven product you purchased as you please. when all of his classmates are The education you receive in college is a combination of a host of factors, and while guaranteed to be around and generally class is one of the more important ones, sometimes other things pop up. having fun an hour later?

Personally, I made some of my best friends due to this phenomenon.

That you should be penalized for using your time as you will is a bit That being said, having been free of curfew for about a year now, I unreasonable. The result is that you end up with certain required classes still find the idea of it a bit silly. Seeing as it tends be ineffective, the filled with a compromising number of students who couldn’t care less rule probably only exists as a marketing campaign catered to some odd about the subject material. Not only is this frustrating to them, but it’s collection of parents who feel that knowing their grown children are frustrating to the students who do care, as they are forced to share the tucked in at night will somehow ease the pain of separation. attention of the teacher with people who either do not need it or do not

Moving along, the topic of drinking on campus is something want it. Some students are no more engaged in the classroom than they that almost invariably makes an appearance in any discussion of the would be asleep in bed. This slows the progress of class, unnecessarily rules. The ambition here is fairly transparent. Abuse of alcohol is neither divides the attention of the professor, and aggravates the students who pretty nor moral, and any such instances can have ramifications that are actually interested in the material. extend well beyond the individual. In a small school such problems

Many of the rules are not problematic. For example, while can very easily have a detrimental effect which is felt throughout the professional dress code may sometimes be inconvenient, it’s also the community. Furthermore, prohibiting alcohol on-campus helps to main reason I know how to put on a tie. Most of the policies which do defuse potential problems with law enforcement and donors, as “underpose problems only do so in an incidental way. That being said, not all agers” will inevitably be part of any such on campus drinking. Thus of them are entirely necessary. Christendom will not be as good as it can it makes sense that the school would try to limit the consumption of be until such things are rectified. While this steak is quite good, it could alcohol. This understood, there are several important consequences be even better if it were put back on the burner for a minute or two. of this policy which run contrary to its spirit. For instance, students who wish to partake of alcohol must drive to somewhere they can.

“

” 7 | seven

Feature

Memories From the Class of 2013 by

Theresa Lamirande, ‘13

H

ere’s to the Senior Class: we tip our hats to you. Thank you for four wonderful years; good luck, and may God Bless you in all you do.

“Here’s to the nights we felt alive, here’s to the tears you knew you’d cry. Here’s to goodbye, tomorrow’s gonna come too soon.”

8 | eight

Feature

9 | nine

Patience

Faith & Reason

The Path to Peace

“ ”

by

Maria Bonvissuto, ‘15

Good things come to those who wait.

A

s tedious or trifling as patience may seem, it is really the key to peace of both mind and soul. Christ Himself points this out in Luke 21:19 when he says “In your patience you shall possess your souls.” By practicing patience, we humbly accept God’s will for us each day, in whatever form it takes. This does not mean that we have to be resigned or timid. In fact, to be genuinely patient takes true strength, because it means restraining our passions and exercising our wills to choose God’s way. This way certainly may not be easy, but we can rest at ease by accepting whatever hindrances or obstacles meet us.

We give everything into God’s hands, acknowledging that He as our Creator knows best. The Lord’s pace may not necessarily be our pace, but His is better.

Patience contains several aspects. We must learn to be patient with others, of course, but also with ourselves. As Catholics, and brothers and sisters in Christ, we recognize that we are all affected

by Original sin. Yes, there will always be that one person who has an annoying habit, or the friend who can’t seem to get rid of a particularly irritating vice. But however frustrated we may feel with them, our first duty should be to show charity and assist them in any way we can.

Tragically, our impatience with the faults and failings of others leads us to overlook their good qualities and talents. Instead of peacefully trying to help them overcome difficulties, we demand instant perfection from those surrounding us. This impossible desire only leads to tension and strife in the community.

Patience with self is equally as important. “Be patient with everyone,” said St. Francis de Sales, “But especially with yourself; I mean that you should not be troubled about your imperfections and that you should always have courage to pick yourself up afterwards.” All of us want to succeed in life; we all have spiritual and temporal goals that we throw our whole life into attaining. We set high standards for ourselves, make resolutions, form ambitions, and, when we fall short, often beat ourselves up about it. However, we forget that Christ doesn’t call us to succeed in everything. He merely asks us to try, to give Him our best efforts, and He will do the rest. It’s certainly admirable to have a plan of life, to challenge ourselves to accomplish certain tasks or objectives.

And we must always strive for perfection in the spiritual life. But if at the end of the day we fall, patience tells us not to become frustrated or 10 | ten

angry. Instead, it allows us to acknowledge that God is ultimately in control, pick ourselves up, and start again. The diary of St. Faustina records Christ Himself saying that “I do not reward for good results but for the patience and hardship undergone for My sake.” What greater encouragement could we ask for?

Of course, we also must be patient with God’s Providence if we are to achieve true peace.

This involves embracing setbacks, annoyances, and sometimes even pain and sorrow without complaining. When things don’t go our way, or life takes an unexpected turn, sometimes we’re tempted to let out an irritated sigh and mutter “Really, Lord? This wasn’t the way I planned it!” But ultimately, our day-to-day work, and even our vocation and occupation, can only be fruitful if we prayerfully and patiently accept what God sends us. St. Faustina said, “I have found that the greatest power is hidden patience. I see that patience always leads to victory, although not immediately; but that victory will become manifest after many years.” Whatever we are trying to accomplish, whatever we are trying to discern about our lives and our future, we can only truly do so through patience. Sometimes God will ask us to wait a while before we discover His plan for us. However, not becoming stressed or anxious, and calmly placing all our affairs in His hands will ultimately yield the best results. Patience quiets our hearts and allows us to clearly hear God’s call.

This being said, it’s certainly not an easy virtue to practice, especially in the frenetic, results-driven atmosphere of our modern age.

However, by invoking Our Lady (the model of patience at the foot of the Cross) and by taking small, simple steps to improve our patience with ourselves, others and God’s will each day, we can certainly make a good start.

Faith & Reason

The Worth of WORDS by

Peter Deucher, ‘15

W

hile sight has long been lauded as man’s pre-eminent sense, and although the eye is often seen as the window to man’s soul, words are what bring people together in a union of mutual understanding. Linguistic substitutes such as sign language and Morse code have not and never will dethrone the spoken word as the primary medium through which we learn what other people are thinking. This much is obvious, for it is no state secret that we express our mental content verbally. But what is not quite so apparent is that words can also reveal how other people think. Ultimately, words reflect the soul itself by revealing the matter and, ultimately, the method of its inner workings.

In the search for his own identity, man has made much of the distinction between men and women, and rightly so, for studying each in turn and then in contrast to the other elucidates many beautiful truths about human nature. For instance, men and women on the whole use words quite differently. The former often see speaking as a means to achieving some practical end. The latter view conversations as a venue for acquainting themselves with the personalities surrounding them. For example, when a guy has just asked a girl to Spring Formal, he simply tells his guy friends she said yes. Whereas the moment she sets foot in her dorm the immediate demand is: ‘How did he ask you? Tell me exactly what he said.’

Furthermore, while women tend to exercise a sensitivity to the minute discrepancies existing between various verbal utterances, discrepancies which include connotation, tone, gestures and demeanors, men often ignore the precise impact of their words and the way they are delivered. This is not to say that men are excluded from the world of wordplay. Men and women alike can and should delve deeply into the realm of rhetoric and acquaint themselves with the art of public speaking, which is far different from a direct, one on one conversation.

Nor must it be presumed that women always say things in the best or most appropriate way. The point is that men and women tend to use words in a way that says something about their souls. A woman’s ability to perceive and communicate well on a personal level effectively demonstrates how she is peculiarly prepared, even in her soul, to pay close attention to other people. Men’s predilection for speaking in a goal-driven manner indicates that the masculine soul, whose unseen inner activity is made manifest through words, is likewise suited to a particular purpose. The way that both men and women use words

shows how the souls of each have an innate ability to perform a certain function. Whether it be dealing deftly with the personal needs of others or completing some practical task, both men and women alike carry an inborn propensity in their soul that matches and compliments their bodily abilities.

Let us elucidate the implications of this generalization further. Women have a knack first for picking up nuances in connotation and inflection, and then for distinguishing such variations in their own choice of words and tone so as to make the intended impression on their hearers. Men, on the other hand, frequently skim over or brush aside the precise implication of their words out of a desire to complete some task. In their practicality, men simply cut to the chase with their words and, in many cases, mistakenly say what they do not exactly mean. Needless to say, the end result is quite precarious, for women can easily intuit what men do not intend.

Generalizations about men and women are well and good as far as they go, but people are too unique to be adequately summarized by broad, sweeping statements. What a given person says and how he tends to think are not subject to strict categorization simply because every person is one of a kind. An individual may quote an author or think alongside the great minds of history, but at the end of the day he will still have the power to create words and thoughts of his own.

So when that special someone nearby starts to speak, stop and listen, because he just might be about to say something that no one else could.

Indeed, every moment in which a person opens his mouth to speak an original word should be cherished as a glimpse into a soul, a peephole, if not a window, opening onto a vista of unrepeatable beauty. In a way, people are like loosely synonymous words in the great oration of God’s creation; they are all similarly human and yet still individually different.

What is truly amazing is that God never repeats Himself.

In the end, the Trinity exemplifies most perfectly the way in which words expose the inner dimensions of their speaker. For Christ, the Divine Word reveals to us the intimate inner workings of the Trinity that would otherwise remains completely shrouded in mystery. If we listen closely to what He has to say, we will begin to discover God’s own interior life. If this insight is genuine, we will inevitably be drawn into the ineluctable love that is the very soul of divinity.

11 | eleven

Faith & Reason

Who’s Right?

The Inclusive Language Controversy In the Words of Its Contenders Christopher Roberts, ‘13

I by

n 1990, during the push to include inclusive language in the New American Bible, the U.S. bishops came out with a document outlining the role and appropriateness of inclusive language in liturgical texts, called “Criteria for the Evaluation of Inclusive Language Translations of Scriptural Texts proposed for Liturgical Use.” Later, after the bishops had tried and failed to get their “inclusivized” version of the NAB approved for lectionary use by Rome in 1992, the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, then headed up by Joseph Ratzinger, published a set of its own norms, “Norms for the Translation of Biblical Texts for Use in the Liturgy.” I encourage you to read both documents on your own; here I have only excised pertinent excerpts for your comparison and consideration. I think they speak for themselves. Emphases are mine. inclusive generic terms, today are often understood as referring only to males. In addition, although certain uses of “he,” “his,” and “him” once “Norms for the Translation of Biblical Texts for were generic and included both men and women, in contemporary Use in the Liturgy” (1997) American usage these terms are often perceived to refer only to males…

“The first principle with respect to biblical texts is that of fidelity, Therefore, these terms should not be used when the reference is meant maximum possible fidelity to the words of the text.” to be generic […].”

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

“[The translation of Scripture] must be listened to in its time-conditioned, at times even inelegant, mode of human expression without “correction” or “improvement” in service of modern sensibilities.”

“The natural gender of personae in the Bible… must not be changed insofar as this is possible in the receptor language.”

“The word “man” in English should as a rule translate adam and anthropos, since there is no one synonym which effectively conveys the play between the individual, the collectivity and the unity of the human family so important, for example, to expression of Christian doctrine and anthropology.”

The United States Bishops:

“Criteria for the Evaluation of Inclusive Language Translations of Scriptural Texts Proposed for Liturgical Use” (1990) “The People of God have the right to hear the Word of God integrally proclaimed in fidelity to the meaning of the inspired authors of the sacred text.” “… [S]ome segments of American culture have become increasingly sensitive to “exclusive language,” i.e., language which seems to exclude the equality and dignity of each person regardless of race, gender, creed, age or ability…. The bishops of the United States wish to respond to this complex and sensitive issue of language in the English translation of… sacred scripture in particular.”

“Words such as “men,” “sons,” “brothers,” “brethren,” “forefathers,” “fraternity,” and “brotherhood” which were once understood as 12 | twelve

“Words such as ‘adam, anthropos, and homo have often been translated in many English biblical and liturgical texts by the collective terms “man,” and “family of man.” Since in the original languages these words actually denote human beings rather than only males, English terms which are not gender-specific, such as “person,” “people,” “human family,” and “humans,” should be used in translating these words.”

“

“Grammatical number and person of the original texts ordinarily should be maintained.”

”

There shall be no systematic substitution of the masculine pronoun or possessive adjective to refer to God in correspondence to the original text.

“Many biblical passages are inconsistent in grammatical person, that is, alternating between second person singular or plural (“you”) and third person singular (“he”). In order to give such passages a more intelligible consistency, some biblical readings may be translated so as to use either the second person plural (“you”) throughout or the third person plural (“they”) throughout. Changes from the third person singular to the third person plural are allowed in individual cases where the sense of the original text is universal. It should be noted that, at times, either the sense or the poetic structure of a passage may require that the alternation be preserved in the translation.”

“It may sometimes be useful, however, to repeat the name of God, as used earlier in the text, rather than to use the masculine pronoun in every case. But care must be taken that the repetition not become tiresome.”

Arts & Culture

L ’enfer, C’est les Autres by

Lauren Enk, ‘14

A

“ ” Hell is other people.

t least, that’s what French existentialist and Marxist Jean-Paul Sartre said. The line comes from his 1944 play Huis Clos (“No Exit,”) in which three damned souls discover that their eternal punishment is not fire-and-brimstone tortures such as abound in Dante’s Inferno, but rather to be locked in a room with the people who will most get on their nerves, to put it mildly, for all eternity.

Sartre’s “Hell is other people” line is usually taken as his commentary on the discomfort caused by living in community with other human beings. The most terrible, exasperating torment, in Sartre’s eyes, is the agony of soul caused by having to live forever alongside someone who drives you up the wall. Their annoying habits, their pettiness or cynicism or stupidity, their disposition and tastes that so frustratingly conflict with yours and require, if you are to live in communion with them, some sort of accommodation or concession of your own likes and desires—that, says Sartre, is Hell.

But another man, an English contemporary of Sartre, had a vastly different vision of Hell. In The Great Divorce, a novel written in 1945, C. S. Lewis made it shockingly clear that Hell is not being forced to live with others you hate; rather, real, genuine, horrible Hell is to be all alone at last with nothing but your sins; alone without any true communion with others or with God. Condemned souls, from Lewis’ point of view, are not souls who suffer because they are forced to be around people they don’t like; they suffer because they are utterly absorbed into themselves, and are left in the end with no solace from their own sins.

Like Huis Clos, Lewis’ novel dispenses with the typical depictions of Hell as a place of physical torture; yet unlike Sartre’s play, The Great Divorce paints Hell as a grey, mundane, dull town where people are constantly restless and dissatisfied, in increasing and agitated personal and spiritual isolation from one another even if they yet remain in some façade of a community. To be sure, they retain a sizeable contempt for their fellow sinners and even for the saints; the arrogant poet considers them all intellectual inferiors, the narrow-minded cynic thinks them all fools, and the self-satisfied apostate thinks them all unenlightened. Yet their punishment is not to be in company with such people, but to have isolated their souls from real and selfless relationship with an “other,” leaving them alone with their pride, or their cynicism, or their lust, or their selfishness.

The essential point Lewis is trying to make is that, in the end, Hell is not a punishment imposed by God upon unwilling, unfortunate souls. It is a deliberate, individual choice, a choice a soul makes freely.

As Lewis’ “guide” through other-worldly regions explains: “There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end ‘Thy will be done.’

All that are in Hell, choose it.” He goes on to clarify that at some point, a condemned soul decided it would rather keep a damning little sin, even if it cannot be happy with it, rather than have that sin taken away altogether. When that happens, a soul becomes practically swallowed up by its self-destroying sin; the soul almost ceases to be itself, and begins to be merely the stuff of its own sins.

Often, as flawed human beings we can be easily tempted to think our problem is other people.

If only so-and-so wasn’t such a jerk, this wouldn’t be so frustrating; my life would get so much better if people just appreciated me. He is just so unreasonable; she whines all the time. Dealing with other people can be so trying an experience that we may despondently declare that someone is “giving us Hell.”

But Lewis’ insight is clear: Hell is not bearing with the (perhaps grave) faults of other people, but living willingly in our own. In reality, human community (“other people”) is our greatest opportunity to grow in charity; it sanctifies us in this life, and is one of the great joys of the next. Here on earth, living with “other people” is not our Hell, but our Purgatory: it teaches us to learn about, cope with, and grow out of our own faults in order to function as best we can in a faulty human society.

In heaven, at last, we will be relieved of our deficiencies and our sins will be erased from our souls, so that the “other people,” the community of saints and angels, will not be a burden but an everlasting joy—that exchange of mutual love with each other and with that all- important “other,” God, for all eternity.

While Sartre may have been on to something about the pain of living in community, he missed the other side of the coin: in a certain sense, Heaven is other people—because we cannot get there, and we cannot choose to be there, without being other-centered, without coming to live in the selfless communion of love with God and man.

13 | thirteen

Arts & Culture

The Mom Who Knew Too Much by

Lauren Enk, ‘14

A

couple summers ago, Robert Osborne, the long-time TV host was completely heartbroken when his infant son drowned. Or, instead for Turner Classic Movies, took a sabbatical for health reasons. of soaking up Pat Boone’s smooth, rich singing voice, I think of the Immediately, a whole slew of aged actors and actresses rallied tragedy surrounding his grandson. I watch the lovely Shelley Winters round to fill in for their friend by introducing the movies and delivering and recall she wound up a fat alcoholic. Ann Margaret’s dancing makes tidbits of trivia to the audiences. While Osborne was taking a break and me think of her accident when she fell off the stage at Las Vegas and TCM frantically scrambled for replacements, I knew exactly whom they suffered severe injuries. should have hired: my mother.

In fact, there almost isn’t a single famous face in classic film

This might sound a little silly, but I’m convinced it would that doesn’t hide some personal tragedy. have been a very smart move for TCM. My mom is not famous and never deliberately made film her hobby. Every stunning silver-screen beauty or dapper Hollywood Dan, no However, she has an uncanny capacity for remembering matter how celebrated, talented, or successful, had some suffering all sorts of interesting facts. She doesn’t try to; she may to bear: childhoods robbed by stardom, battles with addictions, hear something in passing just once, and remembers it painful illnesses, sudden tragic accidents, the bitter wages of simply by chance. Since she’s a fan of old movies, she infidelity or the heartaches caused by the deaths of loved ones. happens to know a prodigious amount of in-depth trivia about the

Perhaps, then, my mother doesn’t really know too much entertainment industry of yesteryear. She would be a mastermind at

about these Hollywood celebrities, but exactly what we ought to know playing “Six Degrees of Separation.”

The following, for instance, is a typical scenario: “Mom,” about them, if we claim to know anything about them at all. How I will inquire as I turn on the old movie channel, “Who’s that actor? can you really understand a human soul unless you have some sense He looks awfully familiar.” My mother will lower her book, glance up of how he’s suffered? Ever since the earliest days of cinema, American over the edge of her glasses and, after peering intently a moment at the audiences have tended to idolize the celebrity faces shining with the fellow in question, confidently announce: “Oh! That’s so-and-so. You meteoric glory of stardom. Teens fall in love with them. Adults imitate remember him from that Western. Later he went on to star in that their styles and fashions. Everyone wants to be them, or at least be mediocre ‘60’s show, which was very popular, and ran for years . . . and like them. A little trivia, however—a little truth, that is—can sober actually his costar in that, before she dyed her hair red, won an Emmy us up from this detrimental idolatry, and remind us that they may be for her performance in that other show. . . that was before she married superstars, but they’re not supermen. No one, certainly no one in the that fellow who was involved in the environmentalist movement.” celebrity spotlight, has a perfect life, free of tragedy and error. They all

When I was younger I would stare at her a minute with my make mistakes and have their own crosses to carry. They suffer as much mouth open, blinking. Now, I typically turn back to my movie, and as any man on the street; sometimes, as they reap the fruit of their sins, reply simply, “Oh. That’s who it is.” This little game—like having my they suffer more. own personal Robert Osborne sitting next to me—can make even

So maybe I shouldn’t complain when my mother mentions mediocre old movies lots of fun for an incorrigible movie buff like me. that the dazzling Vivien Leigh battled debilitating mental illness, or Sometimes. But more often I beg my mother not to tell me anything, that Clark Gable never really recovered from the death of his beloved because of one perennial problem: too much of the trivia is tragic. For wife, or, as you all now know, that Tippi Hedren was mauled by a example: “Oh, look!” said my mother the other day, “That’s Tippi lion. Maybe it’s a needed counterbalance to keep my love of film from Hedren, the star of Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds. You know, she was extending to idolizing film actors. They need neither our adulation mauled by a lion . . .” I rolled my eyes and groaned. It’s not that I’m nor our voyeuristic obsession with their romantic escapades and latest without sympathy for poor Tippi—quite the contrary, in fact—but this haircut. Living or dead, they need our prayers. And that is something sort of thing seems to happen too often. When we spot a famous actor else I hope to pick up from my mother along with the movie trivia: the or actress, my mother calls to mind some particularly sorrowful point habit of praying for suffering souls. Maybe TCM will never hire her about their lives, spouses, childhoods, or deaths. after all; but I know she’s praying for all the famous faces in film when

Now, I like trivia as much as the next person. But the she recalls the little facts she knows about their lives. problem is that, with me—as with my mother—it sticks, like gum on the bottom of a shoe. And so, for instance, when I sit down to watch funny-man Lou Costello play the fool, I suddenly remember that Lou

“

14 | fourteen

”

The Last Word

Thumbs

THANKS, TEACH:

Another opportunity for presenting our opinions on campus occurrences. Agree? Disagree? Have an opinion of your own? Let us know!

Hip, Hip, Hooray! You made it Senior Class!

The Commencement exercises will begin on Friday, May 10th, and will conclude with the Graduation festivities on Saturday, May 11th. Congratulations Class of 2013!

Saturday night featured DTown’s “Dance Under the Stars,” an outdoor strobe-light and glow stick extravaganza, starring guest DJ’s and throw-back snacks. It was a night to remember.

Welcome home to our Rome students! It is good to have you back. We hope that you all had a wonderful semester, and we wish the next group of Romers a safe and memorable trip. Bon Voyage!

Wait a minute... THE SENIORS AREN’T COMING BACK NEXT SEMESTER???

Get your tissues ready.

It’s finals week: Morale and brain power are at an all-time-low and the natives are getting restless. Hang in there kids, it will all be over soon.

A QUICK SHOUT-OUT (To the People Who Apparently Love Us, Though We’re Not Sure Why They Do)

by

The Editorial Staff

As usual, the semester has flown by at lightning speed; it doesn’t feel that long ago that we were planning Sadie Hawkins and getting ready for Lent. Yet here we are at the end of the semester; Spring Formal was a (cold and windy) blast, and finals and graduation are staring us in the face. Maybe it was because the winter was so long, or the spring so sporadic and shy—but whatever the reason, it’s hard to believe that we’ve got less than a fortnight left, and that both the dog days and the thrills of second semester are already tucked neatly away in our memories.

Some of it went by far too fast—in particular, Appreciation Week came and went in the blink of an eye, and we’d like to give a shout-out to that particular crowd that we feel deserves to be a little more appreciated, especially as finals roll round: our professors.

Let’s face it, to work as a professor at Christendom you have to be one of two things: a) extremely devoted and passionate about what you’re doing, or: b) crazy. They work long hours, in the classroom and out of it; they devote their lives to explaining the same material to us over and over until we finally (haha, no pun intended) get it. They stay up into the wee small hours plowing through our monotonously-similar midterms; they devote sizeable chunks of their day to office hours so they can explain the class material to us yet again, if we need it, listen to us panicking about our papers, and give us guiding advice and support. Yet they don’t get tons of fan mail every week, they don’t get thanked very often, and when Appreciation Week comes around, their reward is . . . new markers.

Now, granted, they needed the markers. But after standing on their feet all day, getting hoarse expounding the same material to three or more sections, and trying to make clear for us what exactly is the difference between esse and essentia or spurring us to understand the symbolism of Dante or explaining why the Roman Empire collapsed until we remember it, they still don’t get appreciative applause for their herculean labors on our behalf. Instead, they look out into a classroom filled with faces glancing eagerly at the clock and heads nodding sleepily towards our notebooks.

They put up with our whining about how long our papers have to be, and our grumbling about how slowly they are grading our midterms. Yet they complain remarkably little when we beg for extensions and ask to take midterms late, or fail to actually read the material before class.

We demand more one-on-one attention than we could ever expect from professors at a public university, but they give it to us. And to top it off, they certainly don’t get rich teaching us. The men and women who patiently coach us through Turabian and Aristotle year in, year out, don’t even get the comforts of tenure or the luxuries of a cushy research position in a larger university.

That basically leaves only one reason for them to hang around this crowd of doodling, procrastinating, wisdom-seeking C-dom kids: it’s pretty obvious that they actually care about us.

In the end, there’s only one answer to why they would stick with a job like that: because they love what they do, and they seriously want to share the beauty of a liberal arts education with us.

So, thanks, professors. Maybe we sometimes complain about the way you graded the 7,000th essay on Sparta and Athens, or maybe we act as though we’re entitled to a better study guide or class outdoors more often. But in the end, we’re deeply grateful for all the hard work you do, and we’d like to express our gratitude—because we know that new markers aren’t really enough.

15 | fifteen