Kevin Schemenauer

Joined: Jan. 2, 2012


Kevin Schemenauer is an Assistant Professor of Moral Theology at Saint Meinrad Seminary and School of Theology in Southern Indiana. He wrote his dissertation on Dietrich von Hildebrand’s treatment of procreation which was published as Conjugal Love and Procreation: Dietrich von Hildebrand’s Superabundant Integration with Lexington Books in the spring of 2011. He is happily married and the proud father of two sons.

Most recent posts by Kevin Schemenauer:     (See all of them)

No posts yet

Latest comments by Kevin Schemenauer:     (See all of them)

Re: Thoughts on modesty abroad, in three vignettes

Jun. 9 at 12:27pm | see this comment in context

Thank you for the follow up, Katie. This is a rich discussion. In particular, I appreciate the clear way you express:

1) Men should not blame women for their lust; and

2) One should be very reluctant to accuse women and girls of immodesty.

Since these options are off the table, what are some positive responses one could offer to women concerning their clothes, modest or immodest?

Re: Thoughts on modesty abroad, in three vignettes

Jun. 9 at 10:59am | see this comment in context

I have enjoyed this discussion. In particular, I appreciate the challenge to focus on what is happening internally related to clothing choices both for the one wearing the clothes and for the one reacting to the clothes. What we do with our body is an extension of what is happening internally. Further, the clothes we wear serve as an extension of what we are doing with our body. The movement goes from interior to what we do with our body to the clothes we wear.

I would be interested to hear more about how to bring together the following two statements (and/or how these statements misrepresent the direction of the discussion):

Women should wear the styles of the day as long as they have proper intentions?

Women should be more aware of and sensitive toward the challenges men face in trying to be chaste?

Related to this, and with these new founded insights in mind, what are things you would consider or how would you address someone who asks for your opinion about a revealing article of clothing?

Also, when certain clothes accent the beauty of another how can one affirm the person's beauty over the beauty of the clothes?

Re: Dwarfing the Other

Jun. 4 at 12:28pm | see this comment in context

Marie, thank you for this thought provoking piece.

Your comments on envy reminded me of Dietrich von Hildebrand’s discussion of the passions in his book, The Heart. He describes the passions (e.g. ambition, covetousness, lechery, avarice, hatred, or envy) as dark, violent, and anti-rational emotions. I have been trying to make sense of his use of the word violent in that context.

Your introduction of the word “dwarfing” seems to add to his discussion. While not mutually exclusive, perhaps there is a distinction to be made in intentionality between “self-dwarfing” and “other dwarfing” and “self-enlarging” and “other enlarging” even while all sin dwarfs us and others in the sense of making us to be, and perceiving ourselves to be, less than we could be?

The dwarfing seems to have more of a violent character than the enlarging.

Re: Dr. Allender on abuse and recovery

Aug. 31 at 11:26pm | see this comment in context

Jules, I am not sure I understand womb-envy, but I do understand the tendency for power dynamics to work their way down the power chain. To your last question, I thought immediately of my five year-old son. When I discipline him, he often takes his frustration out on his younger brother. Consciouly or unconsciously, I am more insensitive to my children when I want and lose control of the world around me. A third anecdote speaking to the tendency to injure innocence: I re-call in High School that many people in my small class would try to scandalize or make fun of a girl who lived out her faith in joy, humility, and confidence. She seemed to be a target simply because her life was a challenge to others.

Re: Are wives supposed to submit to their husbands?

Aug. 13 at 1:09pm | see this comment in context

I am someone reluctant to take headship over another and agree with Grabowski’s analysis of Ephesians. He was my dissertation director and has been a great mentor for me.

I have often struggled to give content to this idea of headship and submissiveness. Are the terms no longer relevant, a cultural and historical artifact? One place in my own marriage where I thought there might be some relevance to the term was during and shortly after the birth of our two sons. If my wife asked for something, she got it, so she was in charge in perhaps the most important ways. She was focused on the birthing process and then after birth, recovering, nursing and nurturing a newborn. During and shortly after the birthing process I had to have courage and confidence to make decisions on my own that I would usually make with my wife. That was an experience. This is a question: since men and women are different, can we speak of ways in which men and women are generally (maybe not universally) the head and generally submissive or would any such notions of complementarity be unique to each relationship?

Stay informed

Latest comments

  • Re: Attending to the interior
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Attending to the interior
  • By: Jules van Schaijik
  • Re: The Weary World Rejoices
  • By: Gary Gibson
  • Re: Assessment Run Amok
  • By: Devra Torres
  • Re: Assessment Run Amok
  • By: deb
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Gary Gibson
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Rhett Segall
  • Re: Cutting ties
  • By: Leonie

Latest active posts

Reading circles