Women Can Be Priests
Reply to post

Sexism in the Church

Page: 12345 > Showing page 1 of 5 - Powered by APG vNext Trial
Author
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
2007/10/07 05:33:06 (permalink)

Sexism in the Church

If you recognize that exclusion of women from the sacrament of Holy Orders is sexist. If you realize that sexism is a sin, then you have no choice but to reject the sin and set things right. It doesn’t matter how many people may be 100% in favor of discrimination against women.
 
As long as the Church Hierarchy perpetuates this sin they do not faithfully exercise the moral leadership entrusted to them.
 
I have noticed that every opponent of women’s ordination that has visited this site also subscribes to subjugation of women. They believe women should be submissive to their husbands instead of promoting an egalitarian relationship in marriage. Hence it would appear that at the root of the sexist treatment of women in the Church is a belief in man’s “God given” authority over women. So what is the official position of the Church leadership on this “wives be submissive” issue?
 
It seems that the Church leaders are beginning to recognize and denounce the immorality of sexism but at the same time want to placate the fundamentalist faction of the Church. However I am not sure if this is actually their intent. They talk out of both sides of their mouths. Is this due to conscious duplicity or is it just a lack of understanding?
 
Thoughts?

90 Replies Related Threads

    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/07 11:44:08 (permalink)
    Good question.  I hope somebody has an answer.
     
    Sometimes I wonder if some in the current hierarchy realise how wrong the Church has been in its treatment of women and that for some statements of say the last 40 years, there has been a reflexive negative reaction against 'radical feminism' instead of a thoughtful response that should properly have said, 'You know what.  You might have a point."
     
    The longer they try to resist Truth, the more they themselves will start to realise they look like double talkers.  They will have to face up to it and bear with the 'eating of crow' that is going to have to happen.  Better sooner than later.  Why linger and let even more crow accumulate on the plate?!!!
     
     
     
     
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/07 14:21:49 (permalink)
      You bring up the" zillion dollar dilemma" here for sure.  Like you say the church has condemned sexism in the world, gone to the UN  I think and said women must be equal politically, economically and socially.  Says discrimination and subordination of women and treating women and children in an inferior  and exploitive way is wrong.  Says women can not be shut out of equal access to jobs and resources.  Then they maintain inequality and shut women out of any decision making committees and any ordination positions in the church.  The hierarchy does the opposite of their equality and women dignity statements and UN proclamations when they shut women out of priesthood or claim wives must submit and be subordinate to husbands.  That is not equality or dignity to be subordinate, inferior, dominated and controlled by men.
       Got to be duplicity and power , control, contempt for women issues.  They teach anti-women ideas still using women hating ancient church writers writings to train priests at the seminaries.  That has to be changed because it teaches new recruits to priesthood that women are inferior and too "different" and that women due to being the gender of a "woman" they claim women can not be a priest: pure sexist discrimination against women is taught to priests.
     
        Got to be pure hypocricy too.  It is so obviously sexist discrimination.  Like you said, they can not talk out of both sides of their mouths here and be believed.
     
        Wives, submit to husbands stuff, is dangerous ideology.  It leads to power inequity and abuse and control  of women.  It leads to the practise that women are inferior, subordinate and without equality.
     
         It does not explain either why single women who do not have to submit to husbands are also barred from ordination in the church and treated with inequality by the church.
     
         Certainly the church by ordaining women would clearly demonstrate it does treat women with equality and dignity with equal access to vocations like priest, deacon.
     
          This women inequality, submit to husbands, women can not be priests ideology is NOT sustainable in any moral or real sense where there is equality in the social and economic parts of society.  It is a policy of hypocricy and duplicity and is morally wrong for the Roman Catholic church to keep excluding women from priesthood, deacons.
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/07 14:48:03 (permalink)
      Dear Sophie 
     
        A post was made recently in Why Do I VIsit This Site   that brilliantly speaks to this issue about sexism and how Jesus does not support sexual discrimination against women.  It is a long post and very pertinent to this issue.  Could you please post it in this thread too?  I am very impressed with how well it speaks about how Jesus does not make women unequal and Jesus does not make women submissive to men.  I thank you for your great help with this website.   In appreciation,   Beverly
    Sophie
    Moderator
    • Total Posts : 14275
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
    • Status: offline
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/07 23:41:36 (permalink)
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Dear Beverly,

    I just finished reading the post.  I agree.  It is brilliant.  I am sure the contributor won't might our sharing it here.

    I will copy the post.  Thanks for the suggestion!

    with love and blessings,
    ~Sophie~
    Sophie
    Moderator
    • Total Posts : 14275
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
    • Status: offline
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/07 23:44:28 (permalink)
    Dear friends,
     
    What follows is a post contributed by one of our Guests.  I agree with Beverly.  It includes much food for thought.
     
    with thanks to the contributor,
     
    ~Sophie~
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
     
    Why am I here? 
     
    Because I believe in Christ. Christianity and Catholicism in particular are getting a bad rap because oppression of women.  The oppression is not of Christ.  I want to help convert others to see that this is not of Christ.  I have learned alot from visiting here.
     
    For centuries Christianity and the Church have been afflicted with attitudes that are inspired by radical masculinism (ie think radical feminism with a flip on who is at the centre.) This is not of Christ.
     

    We must work to purge this affliction from the Church.  Why do I stay?
     
    In spite this 'affliction' which we are working to purge, at the heart of our faith community is Jesus Christ who is not a radicial masculinist. Though we do not always live up to his Way, as Christians we aspire to reach his vision, understand his teachings and emulate his personal model. In terms of his attitudes towards women, through both word and personal action he honoured us in the very highest kinds of ways. He did not teach that women should be submissive to men. Despite the sins of Christians and the Church, it is this Jesus who survives and continues to invite us to move forward closer to his Way.

    Somebody else shared somewhere on this site her observation that when it comes to other great heroes in terms of their relationships with women -- people like Einstein, Gandhi, Che Guevara, Pablo Neruda, Pablo Picasso, Nelson Mandela -- each one of these men made tremendous contributions to knowledge and human rights. Yet behind all of their accomplishments, there were often women who were used, ignored, abandoned or abused. Neruda, Che Guevara and Einstein each had amazingly intelligent wives who contributed greatly to their formation and invariably their accomplishments. Yet each one of these men abandoned their wise women for ladies, in most cases younger, who were less intelligent but good housewives. Gandhi and Picasso were notoriously unfaithful in their marriages. I wonder if these men would have respected me had I been given the opportunity to know them. To many of these men, the women who were closest to them were treated as second class.

    Not so with Jesus. He did not abandon the wise women who were around him. He honoured women's intelligence. He praised Mary of Bethany for making spiritual learning at the feet of the master a priority over housework. He engaged in theological discussion and debate with the Samaritan woman. He did not shoo her away. He honoured her intellect and her spiritual life. He honoured the wisdom of the Syro-Phonecian woman. He honoured the negotiation skills she used in dialogue with him. He demonstrated an ability to listen to what she said. He was not embarrassed to take her opinion into account. Because of her, his understanding of ministry was expanded when he did just what she challenged him to do. Also, despite the fact that women were not credible witnesses in his time, he led the way on respect for women by revealing himself to Mary Magdalene and choosing her to be the first witness to the resurrection. Despite the displeasure of men around her, he appointed her to be the foremost among the apostles. She is revered as the Apostle to the Apostles. Contrary to rules that say only men may annoint, Jesus modelled receiving annointing from women at sacred moments in his life. He was not threatened by women who asked questions (the Samaritan woman.) He was not threatened by women who respectfully challenged him (the Syro Phonecian woman.) In fact, contrary to the way he thought things should be done, he role modeled changing his mind by taking guidance from his mother (wedding feast at Cana) and suggestion from the S-P woman. His first believer was a woman (the Samaritan.) His first preacher and missionary was a woman (Samaritan woman, too.) He came into the world as flesh and blood through the mediation of a woman (Mary) and without the direct contribution of any man.Women proved to be his faithful friends until the end. Following his ascension into heaven, women were also part of his missionary team (eg Junia, Thecla, Phoebe...) Christ respected women and listened to them. He didn’’t use their services and then toss them aside.(Having said all this, I would emphasise too that Jesus did not let the men down either. He honoured them, too...especially the down and outters.)

    Though the Church has not been as faithful to Christ in terms of its treatment of women (as admitted by both Popes John PaulII and Benedict on several occasions), on the positive side, the Church now holds up as magnificant role models women who stood by their consciences and did what they knew was right -- even when Church authorities made this very difficult to do. Mary Ward, the founder of the Loreto Sisters is one woman who comes to mind. And though St. Theresa of Avila was threatened with persecution by the Inquisition, she is today honoured as a saint and Doctor of the Church. Another woman honoured as a saint and Doctor of the Church is Catherine of Siena -- patron saint for those who challenge Church authorities. The Church has shown itself capable of cleaning up its act because of leadership shown by women.

    In Catholic Christianity -- unlike other faith traditions -- many women received opportunities to gain higher education. Our Church community also venerates the mother of Jesus as a wise woman, a woman of faith, and the first and most awesome disciple of Jesus.On terms that go a bit more broadly than specifically 'Jesus and women,' Christianity at its best celebrates the underdog. It doesn’’t matter whether we succeed or fail. What matters is that we try our best and in our trying that we learn more of what it is to be ‘‘me,’’ what it is to be ‘‘community,’’ and what it is to depend on God and what it is to love. At our best, we look out for the poor and the oppressed. We practice disciplines that coincide with the seasons thus improving our own stick-to-it-iveness in life. We practice a way of life that emphasises the importance of forgiveness. Through learning how to practice forgiveness, we can be liberated to live more free and joyful lives (as opposed to ones weighed down by the heaviness of grudges.)

    Our spiritualities are diverse. We have many ways of praying. We have beautiful music, beautiful chant, and we honour the intellect. God doesn't ask us to shut our brains down at the Church door. We celebrate the imagination. We respect life. We are an incarnational faith. Every contact, every person, every being, every moment of every day of our lives is loaded with connection to God. Nothing is 'disposable.' Through our lives, God is with us. Everything -- whether success or failure -- provides us with an opportunity to learn more about God and our connection and dependence on the Divine One.We celebrate community. We are not independent of but interdependent with others. Our foundational rule is Love. We seek the Truth.At the heart of our communal prayer life is the eucharist during which we celebrate our connection with God and each other as we remember we are one in the Body of Christ.We celebrate the fact that our lives as individuals and community are a pilgrimage. We are surrounded by literally thousands upon thousands of spiritual guides through the communion of the saints.

    More than anything else, I love being a Catholic because of the fact that it is a faith that emphasises God in each one of us. We do not worship a distant God but one that is very much at home with us. Our God in fact role modeled this by taking on our own humanity ...a clear message that we are joined in partnership. Through living holy lives, we are called to be one with God. I can be reassured that even when I might feel alone, God is with me...always until the end of time.
     
    There is enough good going on here that in my estimation, it is worth the effort to help this Church mature more in the way it welcomes women.
    Sophie
    Moderator
    • Total Posts : 14275
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
    • Status: offline
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/08 02:11:01 (permalink)
    I have noticed that every opponent of women’s ordination that has visited this site also subscribes to subjugation of women. They believe women should be submissive to their husbands instead of promoting an egalitarian relationship in marriage. Hence it would appear that at the root of the sexist treatment of women in the Church is a belief in man’s “God given” authority over women. So what is the official position of the Church leadership on this “wives be submissive” issue?

     
    Dear friend,
     
    A great observation and excellent question!
     
    In his September 30, 1988 encyclical Mulieris Dignitatem (on ‘the Dignity and Vocation of Women,') Pope John Paul II corrects the teaching of Saint Paul (something which no Pope has ever done) and the traditional teaching about the concept of man as 'head of the woman.'
     
    In the encyclical he writes:


    The Biblical description of original sin in the third chapter of Genesis in a certain way "distinguishes the roles" which the woman and the man had in it. This is also referred to later in certain passages in the Bible, for example, Paul's Letter to Timothy: "For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." (1 Timothy 2:13-14) But there is no doubt that independent of this "distinction of roles" in the Biblical description that first sin is the sin of man, created by God as male and female. It is also the sin of the "first parents," to which is connected its hereditary characters. In this sense we call it "original sin." ...

    The author of the Letter to the Ephesians sees no contradiction between an exhortation formulated in this way are the words: "Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife." (5:22-23) The author knows that this way of speaking, so profoundly rooted in the customs and religious tradition of the time, is to be understood and carried out in a new way: as a "mutual subjection out of reverence for Christ." (Cf. Ephesians 5:21) ...

    In relation to the "old" this is evidently something "new": It is an innovation of the Gospel. We find various passages in which the apostolic writings express this innovation, even though they also communicate what is "old": what is rooted in the religious tradition of Israel...However, the awareness that in marriage there is mutual "subjection of the spouses out of reverence for Christ" and not just that of the wife to the husband must gradually establish itself in hearts, consciences, behaviors and customs. This is a call which from that time onward does not cease to challenge succeeding generations; it is a call which people have to accept ever anew. ...

    But the challenge presented by the "ethos" of the redemption is clear and definitive. All the reasons in favor of the "subjection" of woman to man in marriage must be understood in the sense of a "mutual subjection" of both "out of reverence for Christ."


    In his book, When A Pope Asks Forgiveness:  The Mea Culpa of John Paul II, (Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1998, p. 107) author Luigi Accattoli observes:

    The boldness of this reinterpretation of St. Paul's teaching has been recognized by the feminist movement and had previously been requested by theologians favourable to it.  This is how it was originally stated by Hans Kung, as early as 1976 (twelve years before Pope John Paul's Apostolic Letter, Mulieris Dignitatem : "New Testament statements concerning the subordination of a wife to her husband (mostly found in later New Testament writings) must be understood in their sociological context and present socio-cultural conditions must be taken into account."  (Hans Kung, Reforming the Church Today, Peter Heinegg et al, New York: Crossroad, 1990, p. 102)


    I will look around in our library for some articles that will help us unfold  this a little more.
     
    with love and blessings,
     
    ~Sophie~
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/08 02:49:47 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Sophie

     ......................
     
    In his September 30, 1988 encyclical Mulieris Dignitatem (on ‘the Dignity and Vocation of Women,') Pope John Paul II corrects the teaching of Saint Paul (something which no Pope has ever done) and the traditional teaching about the concept of man as 'head of the woman.' .................
     

     
    So the Church rejects sexist practices in the secular world, and rejects a subordinate role of women in the family as promoted in the letters of Paul and Timothy, but persists in the sexist practice of excluding women from Holy Orders.
     
    Based on this, one would have to conclude that the Church believes that God discriminates against women. Do they really believe this?
     
    It would be as if God was saying  “Do as I say, not as I do.”
     
    What happened to “Be perfect, even as you heavenly Father is perfect”.
     
    Zenobia
    Starting Member
    • Total Posts : 23
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/08/20 22:30:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/08 02:54:32 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Guest

    If you recognize that exclusion of women from the sacrament of Holy Orders is sexist. If you realize that sexism is a sin, then you have no choice but to reject the sin and set things right. It doesn’t matter how many people may be 100% in favor of discrimination against women.
     
    As long as the Church Hierarchy perpetuates this sin they do not faithfully exercise the moral leadership entrusted to them.
     
    I have noticed that every opponent of women’s ordination that has visited this site also subscribes to subjugation of women. They believe women should be submissive to their husbands instead of promoting an egalitarian relationship in marriage. Hence it would appear that at the root of the sexist treatment of women in the Church is a belief in man’s “God given” authority over women. So what is the official position of the Church leadership on this “wives be submissive” issue?
     
    It seems that the Church leaders are beginning to recognize and denounce the immorality of sexism but at the same time want to placate the fundamentalist faction of the Church. However I am not sure if this is actually their intent. They talk out of both sides of their mouths. Is this due to conscious duplicity or is it just a lack of understanding?
     
    Thoughts?

     
    They are talking out of both sides of their mouths and in my view, they are starting to realize the awkwardness of their position.  I am prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt in saying that I believe it began as a lack of understanding  (for instance, comparable in the way that senior men in corporate structures must be 'educated' in learning how to work with women.)
     
    The consciousness raising work of the feminist movement awakened them to the reality that 'submission of wives' is not from Jesus.
     
    It used to be that exclusion of women from priesthood was based on the supposed inferiority of women.  Now that they have crossed the hurdle, at least on paper, that women are not inferior, they are getting themselves into all kinds of twisted machinations trying to justify a male only priesthood based on the genetic equipment of Jesus Christ.
     
    They look ridiculous.  I have a hunch they themselves are beginning to recognize this.  I am quite certain it won't be long now.  They don't like having pie on their faces.
     
    Z
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/08 03:33:28 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Sophie


    Somebody else shared somewhere on this site her observation that when it comes to other great heroes in terms of their relationships with women -- people like Einstein, Gandhi, Che Guevara, Pablo Neruda, Pablo Picasso, Nelson Mandela -- each one of these men made tremendous contributions to knowledge and human rights. Yet behind all of their accomplishments, there were often women who were used, ignored, abandoned or abused. Neruda, Che Guevara and Einstein each had amazingly intelligent wives who contributed greatly to their formation and invariably their accomplishments. Yet each one of these men abandoned their wise women for ladies, in most cases younger, who were less intelligent but good housewives. Gandhi and Picasso were notoriously unfaithful in their marriages. I wonder if these men would have respected me had I been given the opportunity to know them. To many of these men, the women who were closest to them were treated as second class.

     
    Would these men have treated you as second class? You can count on it.
     
    Unfortunately one cannot always rely on the fidelity of a spouse. This is one of the dangers of living vicariously. If these women had intelligence and talents they should have used them in their own right. Unfortunately, society being what it was (and in many ways still is) their opportunities and encouragement would have been slim or none.
     
    Part of feminist philosophy is to encourage women to use their talents and not to bury them.
     
    Would God give a woman the talents to be a priest and then ask her to bury them?
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/08 13:01:25 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Guest

    ORIGINAL: Sophie

    ......................

    In his September 30, 1988 encyclical Mulieris Dignitatem (on ‘the Dignity and Vocation of Women,') Pope John Paul II corrects the teaching of Saint Paul (something which no Pope has ever done) and the traditional teaching about the concept of man as 'head of the woman.' .................
     


    So the Church rejects sexist practices in the secular world, and rejects a subordinate role of women in the family as promoted in the letters of Paul and Timothy, but persists in the sexist practice of excluding women from Holy Orders.
     
    Based on this, one would have to conclude that the Church believes that God discriminates against women.


     
    Yes.  And a hypocrite, too. 
     
     
     
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/08 13:40:49 (permalink)
       Good thing the popes say Jesus, God, Holy Spirit are the head of the church, the authority.  Though most of the time they seem to defy and ignore this .
     
       Jesus is no hypocrite.
     
       Jesus endorses women in full church inclusion.  Jesus calls both men and women and married ones too to be his representatives, his co-workers, his priests.
     
       Jesus is the greatest supporter of women being worthy and called to be priests.  The church has to get on board with the teachings, actions and real tradition of Jesus.
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/09 02:44:40 (permalink)
    It has occurred to me that JPII’s encyclical on St. Paul and Timothy’s letters does not claim infallibility. This leaves the door wide open for conservative Catholics like those in “Women of Truth” and “Women of Grace” to promote fathers as spiritual heads of the family and motherhood as “the full-time career” for married women.
     
    Such groups actively promote women in submissive or subordinate roles within the family. As I understand it, they believe women are free to express their opinions (how nice of them) but men have the final veto power. They hide behind words like complimentary but not identical. This is code for <we’ll say you are not inferior but that’s not how we will treat you>.
     
    Such family relationships, as promoted by these and other radically conservative Christian groups (both Protestant and Catholic), are in many ways identical to the treatment of women within the Church.
     
    I find it very hard to believe that Church leaders like JPII are not being duplicitous when they offer a more enlightened interpretation of the scripture yet at the same time seem to endorse those who reject such enlightened interpretations.
    Sophie
    Moderator
    • Total Posts : 14275
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
    • Status: offline
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/15 17:23:13 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Guest

    It has occurred to me that JPII’s encyclical on St. Paul and Timothy’s letters does not claim infallibility. This leaves the door wide open for conservative Catholics like those in “Women of Truth” and “Women of Grace” to promote fathers as spiritual heads of the family and motherhood as “the full-time career” for married women.

    Such groups actively promote women in submissive or subordinate roles within the family. As I understand it, they believe women are free to express their opinions (how nice of them) but men have the final veto power. They hide behind words like complimentary but not identical. This is code for <we’ll say you are not inferior but that’s not how we will treat you>.

    Such family relationships, as promoted by these and other radically conservative Christian groups (both Protestant and Catholic), are in many ways identical to the treatment of women within the Church.

    I find it very hard to believe that Church leaders like JPII are not being duplicitous when they offer a more enlightened interpretation of the scripture yet at the same time seem to endorse those who reject such enlightened interpretations.


    Dear friend,

    Yesterday, I had the wonderful opportunity to spend some time visiting with Dr. Wijngaards. During our chat, we discussed your observation. And once again, I learned somemore!

    Dr. Wijngaards explained that letters from the Pope are not usually written by him personally. They originate partly from his staff. With this in mind, and considering the text of Mulieris Dignitatem, Dr. Wijngaards shared that from his perspective, there are good reasons to believe that it was written by more than one author. In examing the text, it is obvious that the first half of the letter is more positive to women than the second half. Although the Pope obviously assumes full responsibility for signing the whole letter, this does not resolve the inner tensions in what he stated.

    Inconsistencies in the Church’s attitude to women follow from the fact that the Church’s leadership has not fully solved all the theological and social issues involved. The evidence shows that there is a struggle going on in the Body of Christ (and in the minds of the leaders.) In the case of Mulieris Dignitatem, the struggle reveals itself in inconsistencies – rather than deliberate duplicity.

    With this in mind, our awareness deepens as to the fact that our community is on a journey. Through the work and prayers who contribute to the effort for reform and by studying our history, we can be assured that even Church leadership can be helped to embrace the Truth more fully.

    I hope this helps!

    with love and blessings,

    ~Sophie~
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/15 20:52:25 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Sophie

    Dear friend,

    Yesterday, I had the wonderful opportunity to spend some time visiting with Dr. Wijngaards. During our chat, we discussed your observation. And once again, I learned somemore!

    Dr. Wijngaards explained that letters from the Pope are not usually written by him personally. They originate partly from his staff. With this in mind, and considering the text of Mulieris Dignitatem, Dr. Wijngaards shared that from his perspective, there are good reasons to believe that it was written by more than one author. In examing the text, it is obvious that the first half of the letter is more positive to women than the second half. Although the Pope obviously assumes full responsibility for signing the whole letter, this does not resolve the inner tensions in what he stated.

    Inconsistencies in the Church’s attitude to women follow from the fact that the Church’s leadership has not fully solved all the theological and social issues involved. The evidence shows that there is a struggle going on in the Body of Christ (and in the minds of the leaders.) In the case of Mulieris Dignitatem, the struggle reveals itself in inconsistencies – rather than deliberate duplicity.


    ~Sophie~

     
    When I saw Dr. Wijngaards’ explanation, it made me smile because of the lunacy of the situation. I couldn’t decide if the Church as a singular body could be viewed as schizophrenic or suffering from multiple personality disorder. I tend to lean towards the multiple personality disorder comparison (as in the movie “All About Eve”) since there are very distinct multiple personalities contributing to a single text. You would think that the Pope could at least have one single speech writer per speech, for continuity sake if nothing else.
     
    In any case, both schizophrenia and multiple personality disorder are serious mental disorders. This sends mixed messages to the faithful and puts the mental health of the Church in peril with respect to women.
     
    Zenobia
    Starting Member
    • Total Posts : 23
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/08/20 22:30:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/15 21:34:59 (permalink)
    It's funny that you mention the movie All About Eve.

    I recently saw the documentary movie, The Corporation. The thesis of the flim is that If one applies the criteria to diagnose a psycopath (as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSMV)), corporations (which by law are defined as a 'person') fit the bill and would be involuntarily hospitalized.

    Zenobia



    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/15 21:43:34 (permalink)
    Dear Zenobia   What does your name mean please?  Is Zen refer to balance and energy?  Did you post about Paschal Mystery? and what is meant by that  for you as I do not have much formal training in religion myself.  It ia very important too.  Janet
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/15 22:51:53 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Zenobia

    It's funny that you mention the movie All About Eve.

    I recently saw the documentary movie, The Corporation. The thesis of the flim is that If one applies the criteria to diagnose a psycopath (as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSMV)), corporations (which by law are defined as a 'person') fit the bill and would be involuntarily hospitalized.

    Zenobia





     
     
    Without getting too much off topic, I once attended a corporate retreat where the president of the company addressed our department. He began his talk with the observation that the structure of most major corporations was modeled after the Catholic Church.
     
    I remember one person in the audience raised the question of confession and how it factored into this model, which brought much laughter. It was generally agreed that while confession was good for the soul, it was not so good for the reputation. Perhaps the closest corporations come to confession is the performance review.
     
    But it is an interesting comparison since we have hierarchal structure, sexism and now multiple personality disorder as traits common to both.
     
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/16 01:35:53 (permalink)
      I saw the documentary Corporation and loved the way it showed how multinational corporations fit the criteria for psychopaths, 
     
    ) I was reading the website .org on matthew fox (the theologian, and not the actor, there are 2 Matthew Fox that are well known.  I do not know the actor one. ) The one who writes on religion, Creation Spirituality, and is called a "feminist theologian" by the Pope and calls it Original Blessings (not Original sin,) I agree, blessing.  The site is a .org site.
       Very interesting the insights he shares about pope benedict XVI and the Roman Catholic Church.
    Guest
    Super Member
    • Total Posts : 14706
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
    • Status: online
    RE: Sexism in the Church 2007/10/16 18:18:14 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Guest
    (as in the movie “All About Eve”)

     
     
    Oops, I actually meant to refer to the movie “The Three Faces of Eve” and not “All About Eve”. The first deals with a multiple personality disorder and the other deals with deliberate deception.
     
    Perhaps something in my gut still suspects duplicity on the part of the Vatican.
     
    Page: 12345 > Showing page 1 of 5 - Powered by APG vNext Trial
    Guest
    Quick Reply: (Open Full Version)
      Enter the random characters shown
    Submit Post
    Jump to:
    © 2020 APG vNext Trial Version 4.6

    This website is maintained by the Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research.

    Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research

    Visitors to www.womenpriests.org since 11 January 2014

    Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research