Truth from the Heart: dignity

Better than Cheap Thrills: The Art of Leisure

6:00:00 AMJonah Soucy

This past week I was talking to one of my friends about our winter break in between semester and how it was going for him. He looked at me and said it would have been good so far if he knew how to relax. He then proceeded to explain that whenever he’s not doing anything productive he gets anxious and feels like he’s wasting time. After listening for a little while, I realized he was touching on something that I too have experienced at times in my life, the classic workaholic blues.

So what is it that leads to these feelings of inadequacy and restlessness? I think that a lot of it stems from the utilitarian spirit which has penetrated our society, whispering in our ears at all times and saying that unless something is useful to me, it has no intrinsic worth. These lies lead us down a path of obsession, spending countless hours fretting over success and fame, popularity and approval. We feel as if we are not worth anything unless we become something great. We work in order to feel useful, and too quickly we forget that we work in order to enjoy life and not vice versa. In a world focused so much on becoming, it can be a real challenge to find time just to be.

Now we need to be clear here in addressing what leisure isn’t: leisure is NOT spending time playing video games or scrolling through a newsfeed or spending an hour gossiping on the phone. It doesn’t just mean “relax and do something that will distract you from your woes for a little while.” As a kid playing Call of Duty night after night, I remember being struck one time by the sheer amount of time I had put into the game. In one moment, I realized how disconnected from reality I was. I liked the rush of going on a streak and beating my friends online, but I knew there was an emptiness under all of it. In less than a year, a new game would be out and this one would be obsolete, nobody would remember my online ranking. I was spending time on cheap thrills and missing out on better things like deeper friendships and encountering the intrinsic beauty in the world around me. The game served its purpose well, it distracted me from reality and allowed me to live in a world of make-believe for a little while, where I could hope to find some fulfillment. Its utility was that took me out of reality and into another realm.

I’m not writing here to bash these things, though. Video games, social media, and other escapes from reality (like reading fiction or watching netflix) can all be a good things. There are definitely times in our life when we desperately need to escape for a bit and just chill out. I, like many others, enjoy many of these things on a regular basis. What I want to do here is drive a wedge between these things and a proper understanding of what leisure truly is.

Josef Pieper calls leisure the “foundation of Western culture.” We do “unleisurely” activity in order to have leisure. (1) It is a crucial element of life which we are designed to spend time in. However, by substituting true leisure with these forms of false leisure mentioned above, we are never quite able to “get our leisure fix” in a sense, and we are left feeling empty afterwards.

According to Pieper, the soul of leisure lies in celebration, and the meaning of celebration is “man’s affirmation of the universe and his experiencing the world in an aspect other than its everyday one.” (2) It sounds similar to the idea of “escape” that I mentioned earlier, right? However, the key difference lies in this: while netflix and videogames and the like provide avenues to experience other worlds, true leisure takes us into a deeper experience of the one we’re living in. It allows time for an encounter with truth and beauty. Putting ourselves in the presence of loved ones, going out into the wild for a hike or a hunting trip and experiencing the raw beauty of nature, learning to refine the ears to be able to pick out all the intricacies and beautiful elements of classical music or picking up a new hobby in woodworking; these are all examples of leisure which will leave you feeling satisfied and more fulfilled, in a way that surfing the web or binge watching a tv show won’t.

The holidays are now over. Everyone is getting back to the grindstone. This doesn’t mean we have to put leisure on hold. Each and every day can provide a new way to take time for leisure in our lives. If we allow work to consume our lives, what are we living for? To those who say I can never take a break, I say this: No, my friend, you can’t afford not to.

Josef Pieper, “Leisure: The Basis of Culture p. 1
Josef Pieper, “Leisure: The Basis of Culture p. 2

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

ACC Alice von Hildebrand dignity

Diversity as Perfect Equality

6:00:00 AMAnonymous

You may have noticed a recent uproar in mainstream media regarding transgender policies. In a recent statement from the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the seven scheduled championships in North Carolina will be relocated due to their “commitment to fairness and inclusion.” (1) The Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) is moving their championship game to an unspecified location, and even the NBA publically announced in July that their 2017 All-Star game would not be held in North Carolina. (2) According to Mark Abadi from the Business Insider, ”North Carolina’s “bathroom law” has already cost the state nearly $400 million.” (3)

What’s with the uproar? Well, North Carolina passed a law mandating transgender people use the restroom that corresponds with the biological sex found on their birth certificate. The law also indicates that local governments can’t protect LGBT people using nondiscrimination ordinances. Is this really providing equality?

What is equality really? Most people would agree it is two different things receiving equal treatment. But when we see it in this way, we see that without difference there can be no equality.

Alice von Hildebrand says, “The fullness of human nature is to be found in man and woman.” (4) Separating sex from gender fundamentally disregards the truth behind man and woman. Our culture often misunderstands equality, diversity, and sexual difference. If you disregard two sexes, then you’re denying the opportunity for differences to be linked with equality. The giving and receiving between male and female is simply the way we were created. Sexual difference is in fact the perfect equality.

“That God has created two creatures of equal dignity with different genders is truly divinely inspired.” (5)

The NCAA and ACC are contradicting the structure of their own organizations, which have separate men’s and women’s sports teams. If gender and sex aren’t connected, then what stops a biological male from joining a women’s team? What makes a women’s sports team a women’s sports team? If we treat sexual differences as an issue of diversity, it seems that a time may come when we don’t have single sex sports teams anymore.

So where does our truth lie? On one hand it’s extremely easy to sympathize with associations such as the NCAA and ACC because our hearts desire justice. But upon further investigation, it becomes clear that their argument is a misunderstanding of humanity. How can the NCAA have distinct men and women’s teams if they separate gender from sex? Alice von Hildebrand reminds us that the fullness of nature is in both man and woman, which indicates that in order for man and woman to be equal they must be different. Sexual difference, when truly understood, is the basis of true equality between human beings...

(1) http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-relocate-championships-north-carolina-2016-17

(2) http://www.smobserved.com/story/2016/09/20/sports/ncaa-boycotts-north-carolina-to-protest-states-transgender-bathroom-laws/1980.html

(3) http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/09/21/North-Carolina-s-Bathroom-Law-Has-Cost-State-Nearly-400-Million

(4) Alice von Hildebrand, Man and Woman: A Divine Invention, 1.

(5) Alice von Hildebrand, Man and Woman: A Divine Invention, 3.

Image One

Image Two

Image Three

America dietrich von hildebrand dignity

Civility, Decency, and Reverence: George Washington Meets Dietrich von Hildebrand

6:00:00 AMRose Deemer

chivalry dignity featured

More Than Just Holding the Door: Reflections on Chivalry in the Light of John Paul II

6:00:00 AMRose Deemer

Image One

“It is the duty of every man to uphold the dignity of every woman.”

-Pope St. John Paul II

It was a cold, windy morning in early December. I was walking from my dorm to the cafeteria behind a couple of guys, none of whom I knew. When we got to the cafeteria door they all headed in, and the last one absent-mindedly pushed the door open in my direction as he went through. But then, he glanced back over his shoulder and saw me, registering the fact that I was a girl. When we got to the next door, he opened it all the way and stood back with a smile, letting me go ahead of him. It was a little thing--just a small gesture of courtesy and respect--but it brightened my morning like you wouldn’t believe. By that one small action, he acknowledged the dignity of my womanhood and gave it the respect it deserves. To reference John Paul II as quoted above, he fulfilled his duty as a man by upholding my dignity as a woman.

Sadly, however, many people today don’t understand the true significance of acts of chivalry. A guy friend of mine once held a door for a woman, only to have her kick him in the shins for treating her with such “blatant chauvinism”: an extreme but unfortunately not uncommon reaction to this gesture. About a year ago, I saw a video by Jordan Taylor of the Youtube channel Blimey Cow in which he argues that the gesture of opening a door for a woman is an act of service and kindness, but that as such it should be a standard for both sexes. As Jordan comments at the end of the video, “If you’re only opening doors for women, that probably is some form of deep-seated chauvinism...you [should] only open doors for girls if you’re cool with girls opening doors for you, too.” While I agree that holding a door for someone is, in and of itself, just a simple act of service, and therefore there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a woman holding a door for a man, I’m not quite satisfied with Jordan’s solution to the problem. I believe that there is deeper meaning to this gesture, small as it is, when it is performed by a man for a woman, and that it is not merely an act of service with equal meaning for both sexes. This deeper meaning has as its roots the now commonly misunderstood concept of chivalry.

Image Two

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “chivalry” as “an honorable and polite way of behaving, especially toward women”. Clearly, the controversy doesn’t lie in “honorable and polite” behavior; everybody wants to be treated with courtesy. The problem phrase in this definition is, of course, “especially toward women.” The fact that the female sex is singled out as particularly deserving of honor and politeness seems, to some, to insinuate an underlying belief in the inferiority of women (though this is not very logical, considering that people of exalted positions--presidents, monarchs, military commanders, etc.--are also customarily treated with particular honor). In his apostolic letter Mulieris Dignitatem (“On the Dignity and Vocation of Women”), Pope St. John Paul II takes a firm stand against this theory. He states, “One must speak of an essential ‘equality’, since both [man and woman]--the woman as much as the man--are created in the image and likeness of God.” (68) As is quoted at the beginning of this post, John Paul also staunchly holds that men have the responsibility to uphold the dignity of women. I would argue that chivalry rightly understood is a synthesis of these two ideals: the “essential equality” of men and women as children of God, and the duty of man to protect and uphold woman. When these two are joined, a simple action like opening a door becomes the sign of a deeper reality, and is transformed from a mere token of common courtesy to an action of true chivalry.

The truly chivalrous man does not use his service to women to belittle them or to glorify himself, for he knows them to be his equals in dignity and value. Rather, by his service he affirms and shows respect for their dignity, both as children of God and as women, and fulfills his God-given responsibility and privilege to uphold and protect them.

What about us ladies, though? Isn’t there a way in which we’re called to uphold the dignity of the men around us? I would argue that there is, and it’s vitally important. Just as men are called to use their strength properly, to serve rather than to dominate, women are called to use their God-given beauty to inspire and bring joy to those around them, rather than to seduce or manipulate. I posit that modesty (something perhaps even more controversial than door-holding) is the realm in which women are primarily called to exercise a sort of chivalry of their own. What better way to uphold and respect the dignity of men by showing ourselves to them as we really are: not as sex objects or near occasions of sin waiting to happen, but as human persons made in the image and likeness of God, with a beautiful dignity which is in no way inferior to theirs, and a set of incredible gifts and attributes which are equal to theirs, but beautifully, wonderfully different.

dignity featured human dignity

The Beauty of Being Seen: The Importance of Personalism and the Life of Karol Wojtyla

6:00:00 AMAnonymous

dignity featured Hockey

Freeing John Scott

6:00:00 AMUnknown

The NHL All-Star game is an annual romp wherein the best hockey players in the world all gather on one rink and put absolutely no effort into playing against each other. Goalies fall over comically instead of stretching out to make goal-stopping saves. Defensemen let wingers whirl around, lest either be injured by a collision. Forwards renowned for back-checking and two-way play lazily float at centre ice, hoping for a tape-to-tape pass that will spring them on an odd-man rush. Like every other all-star game in sports, the NHL’s version is a glorified exhibition, a chance to pull out all the shiny practice moves and do crazy stunts that make fans cheer and hockey purists grumble. This all being said, the All-Star game still means something.

There are many players - most, really - who never get to experience an All-Star game. Being selected, therefore, by either the league or the fans is still an honour. For the above-average player, the good-but-not-great players, going to the game to play with the superstars of the league would be exciting and memorable. For anyone else, well, it would be a literal once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

This brings us to John Scott. Scott, an enforcer, one of the last of a dying breed in the NHL (that is, players whose only skills involve pugilism), was selected by fans to be the captain of the Pacific division’s team this year. Scott, him of the career eleven points (yes, only eleven), was to join the ageless wonder Jaromir Jagr, the dynamic winger Patrick Kane, and the greatest Russian goal-scorer of all-time Alex Ovechkin in the All-Star game. At first, the hulking expert on fisticuffs was hesitant to join the game. However, after conferring with his family, Scott decided to go, adding that he was happy to be able to experience the game, something he had never expected to do, and that he was happy to be able to take his daughters and expecting wife there to enjoy the festivities. John Scott has made a career out of dealing punishment with his fists and taking punishment from the fists and bodies of other grown men. He said some recognition for the hard-working gritty players of hockey was appreciated, and that he’d do his best. Former teammates all agreed that they were excited and happy for Scott. They also praised Scott’s loyalty and locker-room presence, as well as his character off the ice. Overall, from the standpoint of players and fans, John Scott was being rewarded, and everyone was excited to see him play. After all, at least he’d actually try in a game marked by apathy toward defence and exertion.

However, the NHL was apparently unpleased with the fan vote’s results. After all, large sponsorship deals are connected with the All-Star game. Corporate millions could not be sacrificed for the sake of a feel-good story. League officials asked Scott to not participate in the game, as well as management staff from the Arizona Coyotes, Scott’s team. Scott insisted on going to the game, however. Then he was traded. After being waived by the Coyotes, Scott was sent to Montreal, where he is expected to add “veteran leadership” to their AHL affiliate. Because of this trade, Scott may no longer be eligible to participate. This move ignited a predictable firestorm, with fans accusing the league and the trading teams of colluding to keep Scott out of the All-Star game. Blogs lambasting the move appeared overnight, demanding Scott be allowed to play. A Twitter petition was started. Threats were made of boycotting the All-Star game. At the time of this piece’s publication, though, nothing has been resolved. It appears as though the league will move on with its plans for the All-Star game, and that John Scott is no longer going to be involved in those plans.

Now, what can be said about this? First of all, the NHL’s protectiveness of the All-Star game is laughable. There’s no “integrity of the game” to worry about, sponsors will keep paying as long as big-name players are somehow involved, and the game isn’t that big of a feather in the NHL’s cap. Viewership has decreased steadily over the years, prompting the switch this year to a three-on-three format. Second, and more importantly, the treatment of John Scott is despicable. Whether or not the trade was as nefarious as some pundits and theorists are claiming, Scott was coldly removed from a chance to be a part of something hockey players dream about. Scott is the epitome of a hockey player: he’s hard-working, a family-man, a blue-collar-type who cares about his team and works as hard as he can without fanfare. To yank away the chance for him to share something like the All-Star weekend with his family is just not right. So what if he didn’t belong? So what if he can’t score between his legs, deke out a defenceman, or rocket in a one-timer from the faceoff dot?

As I wrote about earlier this year, hockey players (all celebrities, really) are people. They have feelings, desires, ambitions, and are affected by the public spheres into which they are so often thrust without desiring it. Take Scott; he has a family he wanted to share a weekend with, a weekend that could have provided them with countless treasured memories. Instead, he’s been sent far far away from his pregnant wife and children. Now, he might not have a chance to be present for the birth of his two new kids. While the more callous might shrug this off as “part of the game”, they’d be in error to do so. What happened to Scott was a money-motivated show of authority, one that casually tossed aside the very real person at its centre. As I wrote of Patrick Kane, celebrities do indeed accept, to an extent, the spotlight which they are put under; this being said, such does not, in any way, deny them of their entitlement to basic shows of respect. Is it really too much for the NHL to allow for something like Scott’s appointment to the All-Star game? At worst, he trips over his own skates trying to keep up with better players and only scores when his more-talented teammates bank pucks in off his body. At best, a family is given an experience that will remain with them forever, and a man fairly given a reward is allowed to keep that reward; that reward, and some shreds of respect.

________________________________________________

Image I

Image II

Better than Cheap Thrills: The Art of Leisure

Diversity as Perfect Equality

Civility, Decency, and Reverence: George Washington Meets Dietrich von Hildebrand

More Than Just Holding the Door: Reflections on Chivalry in the Light of John Paul II

The Beauty of Being Seen: The Importance of Personalism and the Life of Karol Wojtyla

Freeing John Scott

Tags

recent posts

Popular Posts

Search This Blog

Contact Form