And the March goes on.

I'm disappointed (but not terribly surprised) that the CWL supported the World March of Women. I've never been a CWL member, but up until now I'd always felt a tad guilty about not joining the largest organization of Catholic women in Canada.

Years ago, when I lived in another city, I was invited to join the CWL by a fellow parishioner whom I'll call Doris. I already had many commitments at home, in the parish, and in the community, and couldn't make time for more. I informed Doris of this, thinking it better to be honest right away, than to be perpetually excusing myself when called upon to serve. I offered to take out a membership with the hope of becoming more active in the future. With a wave of her hand she replied, "Forget it--we have enough inactive members," and promptly turned her attention elsewhere.

If anyone else has had a similar experience, may be we can form a support group. I'll start the introductions: "My name is Mariette, and I was rejected by the CWL."

Seems I'm in good company. Since the WMW fiasco began, the CWL has given the cold shoulder to several bishops, the pro-life movement, and even many of its own members. All because of a disagreement over whether or not it's advisable to join with pro-abortion feminists and lesbian-rights activists in order to end poverty and violence against women.

CWL's dalliance with feminism

This isn't new. The CWL has been playing footsie with feminism for years, to the chagrin of many members. When a close friend quit the League a while back, she was admonished by her council's president, who said they must "dialogue" with feminists. (Strange how they weren't interested in dialoguing with my friend on issues that concerned her.)

Another friend and CWL member recently remarked that she wishes the League would do more to build up and strengthen marriage and family life, rather than pursue more popular initiatives, like supporting cancer research, nuclear disarmament and lobbying to have food dyes removed from candy (arguably all good causes, but there are already others fighting these fights). A few years ago, the CWL passed a resolution in favour of promoting a 'smoke-free, scent-free' church environment (banning incense for the sake of allergy sufferers). Would that they had extended their efforts to include "chemical-free" churches and spoken out against contraception.

Christ-centered marriages would end a great deal of poverty and violence against women, but I can already hear the objections. Focussing on hearth and home is such a narrow view of evangelization; it's such an un-glamorous, regressive undertaking. We can't go home, we must get out and rub elbows with the enemy if we're going to convert the masses. (Never mind that the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.)

Frankly, I'm tired of the 'withdraw vs. engage' argument, since the former isn't an option for Christians. When it comes to battling powers and principalities, there's no such thing as "whether" but only "how," and subsequently "how effectively." Cloistered contemplatives, homemakers, and bedridden grandmothers are just as actively engaged in spiritual warfare as those who march, lobby, or make speeches in parliament. None of these latter activities is wrong; Catholics are called to act in every facet of public and private life, but you've got to choose your allies carefully.

Is it ever effective to get into bed with militant feminism, even for a good cause? Could you join the Nazi party (or the Bolsheviks) if they had some good ideas, but also justified the shedding of innocent blood? When we join hands with those who openly mock God, the Church and the sanctity of life, we stand less chance of converting them than we do of simply looking foolish and being misrepresented.

The CWL's dalliance with feminism reminds me of an Irish saying: "If you're going to sup with the Devil, you'd better have a long spoon." Trouble is, when your spoon gets to be longer than your arm, you can't feed yourself. Many CWL members feel betrayed by an organization which is no longer theirs: it doesn't feed them, doesn't support them, doesn't speak for them.

The national executive is pretty sure this will all die down, and members will get over their WMW-related frustration. That remains to be seen. In the meantime, I may just write Doris a thank-you note.