Pope Takes Down Another Barrier for Women
The Pope has declared women may take various roles in liturgy previously reserved for male clergy. No doubt it is another thing the Pope has done that will anger the orthodox. Conservative Catholics, including those who shout prayers and try to talk patients out of abortions in front of clinics, have no interest in expanding or even preserving their faith. They are short-term thinkers
I've written about the Medieval views of women held by Catholics and some branches of Protestant Christianity. I've been instructed that there is "a difference" between men and women. The only specific difference ever mentioned is that women have babies, men do not. That fact has been built into a self-serving religious view women cannot function as clergy nor should they be trusted to make their own decisions on abortions.
No matter how that religious concept of no-women clergy is spun, the result is the same. It is the same as mixed race couples cannot marry nor black people supervise white people. I wish it were possible to have a secret vote of only women in those branches of religion where women could express their views on whether they should be granted clergy status.
It was many decades ago, but I recall when the first woman Assistant Pastor was named at First Presbyterian in Fargo, ND. My wife and I were visiting with a retired businessman and church member. He said, "I'm really having trouble with that (seeing a woman at the pulpit fully credentialed as a preacher)." It had not occurred to us anyone would object but apparently there were some. Fortunately, most large main line Protestant denominations embrace female pastors. Plenty of free standing churches without links to denominations do as well.
It seems to me the last few Popes were moving the Catholic Church backwards toward the Medieval times. Hats off to this Pope for making at least a little effort to move it forward. With its deeply ingrained anti-women views in the Priesthood and abortion, however, its future is one of rejection by Western societies.
I think every parent of a daughter would want to say to that child, "Your future is bright for whatever you want to do in life." If they are devout Catholics there is an asterisk.
yet another of old Jon's child's garden of disinformation and what in his mind passes for "progressivism". there is so much junk in this post that one finds it difficult to know where to start in debunking it. that said, let's start with his take on medieval history, a subject that he obviously knows little or nothing about. seems that he is stuck on the angels and pinheads dismissal of the period between 700 and 1500 AD. he appears to know nothing of the place of women in this society, writing it off as a dreary story of female servitude. au contraire, how about the prominent role played by many Catholic saints in the society of the time. or of figures like Eleanor of Aquitaine, Jeanne D'Arc and the many other women, the powers "behind the throne" in the medieval courts. or his view that the middle ages produced nothing of significance in western intellectual history (an example of chronological arrogance at its worst). how about Aquinas, Albert the Great, Roger Bacon (who did pioneering work in optics). or on the negative side, William of Ockham, the founding father of nominalism, a philosophical movement that has had a baneful influence on modern thought (including I dare say, old Jon's worldview).
ReplyDeleteand another example of presumptive arrogance: Jon's belief that he has some standing to tell the Catholic church what it should do, advice which, if followed, would turn the church into something like Unitarians with vestments and incense. that, of course, is his notion of moving "forward". sounds more like moving backward. or more like dying.
as to women in the Catholic church. seems as if he has overlooked the Marian tradition and the role that female Catholic saints and laity have played in the charitable and theological/philosophical life of the church. several women are in fact considered to be doctors of the church. and his mistaken view that Protestantism has been a great defender of women. until recently, not so. Protestants traditionally have been very patriarchal in outlook.
in fine, I often wonder why and old white guy like Jon is so preoccupied up with feminism and women's issues.
tsm -- I mentioned in this blog and many others male domination is a part of many Protestant branches including the largest one, Southern Baptists.
DeleteI liked your reference, " powers behind the throne." That's the point, why not the throne?
maybe it's safer to be the power behind than to be on the throne. anyway we but seek power after power than ends only in death. old Hobbes probably had both men and women in mind when he penned that line. and why pick on the So. Baptists. patriarchy was mainline in the Calvinist tradition (at least until recently).
Deletetsm -- There are female celebs in the Catholic branch. One is "Mary." "Mary" is so big, but Jesus passed on her when it came to "building the church." When the Pope let's women do some rituals he needs a body guard for his safety.
DeleteYou mentioned I am commenting on Catholic beliefs when I am not a Catholic. The Vatican has a press office which obviously has many employees. It wants people like me to know what good works they are doing. I'm just returning the favor.
if you had in mind women lectors, extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls and the like, I've got news for you. these practices have been rather routine for quite some time. maybe 30 - 40 years or more.
Delete