Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Modesty and Nonsense: A Response to Anthony Esolen

Modesty and Nonsense: A Response to Anthony Esolen

Last updated on: January 18, 2018 at 11:35 am by Mary Pezzulo

Modesty and Nonsense: A Response to Anthony Esolen 2018-01-18T11:35:16-04:00 Mary Pezzulo

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Le_Printemps,_Sandro_Boticelli

This is getting to be a habit. The inimitable DOCTOR Anthony Esolen, whom I was yelled at for calling “Tony,” writes an article to do with sexuality and naughty bits, and I respond. I am told I must not respond because Doctor Esolen is a “good man and a fellow Christian,” and that makes it wrong to dialogue with him, but I’m not a good woman so I will.

This week, Esolen is not writing at Crisis magazine but at “The Catholic Thing,” a publication with which I’m not familiar. The name of the article is “Modesty and Charity,” which has a much nicer ring to it than “Wake Up Father Martin.” I myself have written on modesty several times, though I tend to think of it more as a function of humility than charity. “Modesty and Charity” is a far more subdued piece than Esolen’s infamous “Wake Up Father Martin” and “Talk to your Father.” That doesn’t mean there’s not a lot that raises the eyebrows, of course.

Some years ago at Saint Eustaby Catholic College, in connection with a “Save the Night” protest, a senior editor of the school newspaper wrote that she should be able to “walk down Eaton Street wearing nothing but flip-flops and a smile,” and not have to worry about being assaulted.

She was right…

Wow. I find myself agreeing 100% with Tony Esolen in the first paragraph. He’s not fat-shaming a single mother, he’s saying women shouldn’t be raped. Bravo, Doctor. Let’s see if you can keep this newfound respect for women going much longer.

…in an obvious and trivial way. Assaulting people is against the law. If some drunken kid were to run up to her and grab her, somebody else should drag him away, and if the somebody is a policeman, he should haul him away to the precinct. Of course, he should arrest her too for indecent exposure.

That was nice while it lasted. If a police officer comes across a naked woman being sexually assaulted, I hope he puts a coat over her shoulders and takes her to the hospital, but in Esolen’s world she ought to spend the night shivering in the drunk tank.

And I’m a bit appalled that someone who claims to be so horrified by sexual misconduct in general thinks a woman shouldn’t be sexually assaulted for walking around naked merely because it’s against the law. This isn’t “trivial.” Rape is a mortal sin, it’s a sickening affront to the dignity innate in every person; it’s a blasphemy against the image of God that they bear merely by virtue of being human. It’s not arbitrarily wrong to rape a naked pedestrian because it’s against the law, the way it’s wrong to jaywalk or drive on the wrong side of the road. Rape is and ought to be against the law because it’s always wrong.

It’s the attitude behind the girl’s effrontery that sets me to thinking. I remember an incident that happened one summer when I was helping out at a Catholic Worker house in Washington. I’d been painting one of the halls when the doorbell rang. It was the usual sweltering summer in that sinkhole of fog, heat, and graft, so I was shirtless when I answered the door.

There was an Hispanic lady, about fifty years old, who had a few questions to ask, so I went and got John, my boss. He came to the door and they began to talk while I stood by. It was an ordinary request for certain bits of information, not private.

“Excuse me,” she said, breaking off in mid-sentence and looking at me. I made my apologies and went back to painting. John later explained the matter to me. “She’s a traditional lady,” he said, “and you weren’t wearing a shirt.” I got it. I didn’t think she was prudish or rude.

Team Hispanic Lady here, Doctor. Though I am encouraged that your first example of immodesty in action was a shirtless male. Most writers don’t bother to think of any male examples. You get a cookie. Stop staring like a codfish and put your shirt on before you come get it.

In part, the language of dress is conventional, as all language is, and in part it is not conventional but based upon the nature of the body and the material conditions of the world around us. If I’m in Paris and I utter that legendary sentence from the introductory textbook in French, La plume de ma tante est sur la table, someone will reply, Mais bien sur*, and the day will go on in peace and sunshine. Yet that collocation of sounds means nothing in Peoria.***

But if I’m in Paris and I pass by a small child playing on the sidewalk, and I glance his way and smile at him and his mother, I have communicated the same delight and approval as I would in Peoria or Poona or Papeete. The gesture is universal.

Why are you dissing Peoria? I’m sure there are people in Illinois who understand 101-level French. Even I understand 101-level French. But I think that if an American randomly started ranting about la plume de ma tante to a Parisian, they’d ask “Quelle table?” or glare at you and go back to their cigarettes, rather than meekly saying “Mais bien sur.” And smiling at the mother of a small child is not truly a universally understood gesture of delight and approval either. For example, if the person responsible for writing anything as smutty as “Wake Up Father Martin” looked at my child and smiled at me, I’d pick up the child and run.

Esolen then makes an unintelligible crack at “the prudes of vice,” which would be a fantastic name for a rock band, and starts naming behaviors which are only wrong according to their context. He talks about shouting first, which is a pretty good example, and then fighting which is okay. He might have talked about just and unjust war and I would have been with him one hundred per cent. But he harps on “happy aggression” and his assumption that it’s perfectly normal and wholesome for little boys to wrestle and beat each other up as long as they’re not indoors or in the presence of girls. The example makes no sense. It’s not okay to be violent in the first place. Violence is not something automatically in the nature of males like a nocturnal emission. It’s not more wrong to fight in front of girls as opposed to any other sort of human being. I find it genuinely worrying how Esolen always finds an excuse to talk about little boys fighting. The supposed wholesomeness and even beauty of little boys fighting is one of the overarching themes of his oeuvre.

So also with immodest dress. A woman who dresses to show off her form in a provocative way is saying either, “I want you not to look at my face but at more important things lower down,” or “To hell with you.”

Let me be clear. If I see a woman whose dress seems like a strip of plastic wrap, to be used once and taken off, thoughts of sex come immediately to mind, which is what the woman intends unless she is a fool. So I check myself and turn aside. I don’t want to think those things.

Plastic wrap?

Plastic wrap?

Public face of Catholicism

Previous Post

January 17, 2018

Winter Dark

Next Post

January 19, 2018 The March for Life: Notes from a Lifelong Activist

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category abortion Abuse Advent America American Christianity angel angels Annunciation Appalachia apparition apparition chaser apparition chasers apparition culture art art review babies baby baby Jesus Bad Lip Reading bad statue contest bath beauty Bible story blog blogkeeping blood book review Brandon Sanderson breastfeeding bus Catholic catholic conspiracy alarmism Catholic Oppositional Disorder Charismatic Renewal Charlie the Cat chastity Christ Christian idenitity Christianity and Judaism Chronic Illness clean clothing COD piece comedy compassion conscience conspiracy theory conversion cop-on-black violence Crucifixion cry of the poor culture Daesh Daily Saints death death penalty devotional diaconate diaper diapers dirty disability Donald Trump Dorothy Day dream drugs Eastern Catholicism Eastern Christianity education election election update Elsewhere on Patheos empathy environment Fear feminism film review fish flashback fluffy buns food Franciscan University of Steubenville Friendship Room fun Gabriel gardening gospel hair-splitting Heaven hell heresy Hillary Clinton history Holly the Witch Holy Spirit holy war Homeschooling homosexuality horror human dignity humor Icon idol immigrants infection inter-religious dialogue Interpretation of Scripture Islam Jesus Jihad Joseph joy laity and lay vocations lamb dinner laundry lent lgbtq literature love manners Mary Medicine and Science Meditation mercy mess milk misogyny Missouri monasticism monster motherhood mourn with those mourn movies movis music mystery nature neurodiversity New Pro-Life Movement news nonsense nostalgia O antiphons obituary objectification Ohio Valley Ordinary Time ordination Ordo Amoris parable paradox Passover peanut butter personal beliefs pets philosophy Planet Charismatic poetry politics polls poop Pope Francis Pope Leo power in the Church prayer prayer request prayers preferential option for non-violence president presidential election priest primary private revelation pro-life prophecy Public face of Catholicism Pure Flix Q and A race racism random rape rape. sexuality reader's request Reckoners refugee religious trauma ressurrection Right to life Saints saints and celebrations same-sex same-sex marriage satire scandal secular feasts seder Seven Joys Seven Last Words sex sexual ethics sexuality silencing six months skid row slavery social justice Speculative fiction spiritual abuse spoon stain story suffering suffrage suffragette Sunday Gospel temple Tenebrae Responsories Terror the exorcist The Friendship Room The New Pro-Life Movement Things I Learned on the Internet tin cup traffic true story tv review Uncategorized USCCB vice and temptation violence Virtue virtue and vice war Way of the Cross whimsy whole life women's ordination work of mercy Year A

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the ruler of Egypt during Joseph's time?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Cyrus Nebuchadnezzar Caesar Pharaoh