Females: What do you think of Christian feminist theory?

[Madaglan]

I am presently reading a book called *Co-creating: A Feminist Vision of Minstry. *It is somewhat, though not completely, outdated (published in 1987), and it is written by a Protestant minister, Lynn N. Rhodes.

In reading the book, I often wonder why these Christian feminists think the way they do. They put a lot of emphasis on how women’s faith experiences have been suprressed by the patriarchal system, and that women today need to “empower” themselves and assert their own authority in relation to those around them, although not overpowering others themselves.

What I have difficulty reconciling is the emphasis on power, authority, oppression–it’s all very Marxist to me, and I wonder if perhaps some more radical feminists tend to dramatize the historical situation and make it appear as though women’s faith experiences have always been much de-valued by men in the past. Although I am sure that this has happened, I’m wondering if the real situation has certain qualifying factors which make things different.

I’m just wondering what Catholic women think of Christian feminist theory, and if there are any women here who are a little more than concerned with the assertions that Christian feminists make. It’s interesting, because many of these feminists seem to take their own personal experience as a woman and superimpose this as an expectation upon all women, European, Western, Eastern, Russian, Muslim, Oriental, etc. throughout the world. At least, that’s how I personally perceive it.

So, my sisters in Christ, what are your attitudes towards Christian feminist theology? I have several female evangelical friends who hate feminism. One in fact has “antifeminist” in her screen name to show how much she hates it. It seems, therefore, that not all women rally to feminism, at least to certain aspects of it.

 

[La_Chiara]

Magdalan–Maybe it is a pet peeve, but I gotta tell you, I react viscerally to being addressed as “Females!” It sounds so clinical, as in “the FEMALE of the species”. It feels degrading. “Women” is far preferable to “FEMALES”.

 

[Madaglan]

Originally Quoted by La Chiara:

Magdalan–Maybe it is a pet peeve, but I gotta tell you, I react viscerally to being addressed as “Females!” It sounds so clinical, as in “the FEMALE of the species”. It feels degrading. “Women” is far preferable to “FEMALES”.

I apologize for that. I didn’t mean to insult you. I was thinking of using women, but I didn’t want to exclude teenagers who are female, so I chose “Females.” I also chose Females because of the topic of Feminism and Feminists. Sorry again.

 

[space_ghost]

…did the book of Genesis not describe them as "he made them male and female…?

Matthew 19:4 - And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

Mark 10:6 - But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

…who am i to question the political correctness of God?

 

[La_Chiara]

space ghost:

…did the book of Genesis not describe them as "he made them male and female…?

Ah, but in ancient Hebrew or Aramaic or Greek (for all you or I know), there may not be a distinction between “male” and “man” or “female” and “woman”. So translations, don’t count. I am talking about the use of the English language. (Unless of course, Magdalan was translating from ancient Hebrew or Aramaic or Greek.)

Apology accepted, Magdalan. No harm intended, no insult taken. I just wanted to point out how it could be perceived.

 

[space_ghost]

La Chiara:

Ah, but in ancient Hebrew (for all you or I know), there may not be a distinction between “male” and “man” or “female” and “woman”. So translations, don’t count. I am talking about the English woman. (Unless of course, Magdalan was translating from ancient Hebrew.)

…yes, different issue… the objection was the usage of the term… i am not offended by the usage of “male” should then any woman be offended by the usage of the term “female”? And, don’t get me wrong… different strokes for different ghosts… i just think sometimes we are a little too quick on the trigger… i could be and am probably wrong

Peace:thumbsup:

 

[frogman80]

My wife would be a better one to give any sort of answer on this, but I did learn a tiny bit from her during her philosophy studies. This “christian feminism” just appears to be regular modern feminism with a different name slapped on it.

Regarding the thoughts / philosophies modern feminism (MF), it became clear to me that mf actually takes women’s freedoms away instead of setting them free. Mf tends to put women in positions / situation that not all of them wish to be in. Men and women may be equally important, but we are not equal. We are very different. I look at some of the things my wife has done throughout our life, and even day to day… not only do I not have the ability to do some of those things as well as she does… sometimes I don’t have the ability at all.

I believe P. JPII has some good writings on true feminism / femininity, and the intrinsic value of what it means to be “woman.”

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I hesitate to slam the branch of feminism that got women the vote, or equal pay for equal work. I can in no way embrace the “women-belong-in-the-home-and-their-primary (read “only”) -role-is-as-wife-and-mother” thing, because it leaves women like me with no place whatsoever in this world.

On the other hand, I don’t feel that my “faith experience” has been “suppressed” by “the patriarchal system”. In my experience, this sentiment is often code-talk for “we won’t be happy until women can be priests, and become part of the Church hierarchy”. Women who feel they can’t have an authentic faith experience without becoming priests are severely misguided. Even among men, not all are called to become priests, and that doesn’t stop the men who are not thusly called from developing their faith.

A little alarm goes off in my head when I hear some women talking about “empowering” themselves in the Church (often meant to be interpreted as empowering themselves by being priests and rising in the hierarchy). Women who feel the need for this kind of power should be trying to climb the corporate ladder in the business world. In my opinion, anyone who is just looking at the priesthood as a means of obtaining power, doesn’t have a true calling. The priesthood is a calling, not just another job.

Read the Beatitudes. Nowhere in there does Jesus talk about grabbing power.

Crazy Internet Junkies Society
Carrier of the Angelic Sparkles Sprinkle Bag

 

[Forest-Pine]

I was having this argument the other day! A couple I know (who happen to be extreme fundies) have a very off-balanced marriage and it is apparent that it is not one to model. They believe (both of them) that they are fulfilling their obligatory roles (as she is to be subservient to him and he is to be head of his household). I find it so very sad to watch them.

On the other hand, I know a woman who embodies the other extreme. The woman is proud to be “liberated” and “free” from “patriarchal oppression.” What she is is a slave to modernity. She has no control over herself, her life, no matter how scheduled and planned things are. She doesn’t stand a chance at a model relationship, either. I find it so very sad to watch her.

I strive for a balance. Catholicism (who would’ve guessed it) has a bad rap as being the worst in this “patriarchal” system, and yet is the only Christian model I’ve seen in which it isn’t present. My sister, also a Catholic, was complaining the other day that she wants female priests and that the church should leave it up to the individual women what they want to do re: abortion and other modern catch-phrases. No, I argued. You don’t want a female priest; you want to feel equal and like you have all the power in the world because you’ve been told you can’t have something so you want it even more now. After much thought, she conceded this to be true. What so many fail to realize is that we are equal and we do have a great amount of power! She argued that Jewish women are in charge of Shabbat prayers. Yes, I said–at home they are in charge. In synagogue, they are separated and do not become rabbis. (Reform doesn’t count–it is the UU of Judaism.) Separate but equal. What man has the ability to birth a child? What a wonderful and natural and blessed ability! And yet the time it is most fully appreciated is when a couple is unable to conceive. So many–men and women–take it for granted that women can and do give birth every day, and therefore do not share in the joy of each and every birth. So sad.

I believe it is a lack of respect for traditional female jobs which creates this perceived religious slight, when it is actually a societal one. After all, it isn’t very note-worthy at a 35-yr high school reunion for the valedictorian to say she stayed home and raised a family. It isn’t seen as “work” to be a mom, but more of a side-venture, a hobby. Women aren’t respected when they do traditionally womanly things, so they try to join the male world to get the respect they deserve. It is sad.

My husband and I got several nasty comments when the fundies heard that my husband cooks dinner. (“It must be so hard to work all day THEN come home to make dinner for your wife!” the woman said. “No less than it is for my wife to be expected to work all day then make dinner for me!” he countered. Even she–a homeschooling mom to five who supposedly is fully aware of the blessings and work of motherhood–could not comprehend it.) But if I talk about my time working on the car or riding a motorcycle (both things my husband introduced me to, as even readers here are likely to judge him “girly”), then people are interested in what I have to say. The message is clear: it is only OK to be interested in male things, whether you be male or female. Thus, all “female” jobs like cooking, cleaning, sewing, parenting are relegated to the “uh-huh, right” category.

<cont’d below>

 

[Forest-Pine]

<cont’d from above>

I think it started in the '20s. Women were forced to go to work as there were not enough men to do the jobs. By the time the men were home, the women rather liked being out of the house and doing something that was immediately productive. By the fifties, 4 out of every 10 women worked out of the house. But what jobs could they get? Secretaries, nurses, and teachers. So they banded together to demand respect for the work they do. Then they got carried away and decided they were equal to what (they perceived) men THOUGHT of themselves. So now they deserve better than men.

It is only the Catholic Church which teaches a true balance. Equality. Respect. Faith first, family second is an expectation of BOTH spouses and so long as it is kept the church doesn’t bother itself with how. (Mom working, dad home? Vice-versa? Something else? Is Jesus served? Your family? OK!) Yes, wives are to submit to their husbands. The fundies got this part down while the feminists reject it. Also, husbands are supposed to submit to their wives. Just as Christ lived, loved, and died for the Church, so are husbands to do for their wives. The fundies forget this part, or even join the feminists in outright covering it up as it does not fit their agendas of making the Catholic Church out to be evil so that they can set up their own version of the truth.

Oh, and about “female” and “woman”

Female is an adjective, describing the attributes of a woman, which is a noun. Womanly (and its tenses: womanlier and womanliest) sounds very encumbering and does not exactly roll off the tongue. What would cause one to revile a proper usage of a word except for the emotional baggage one attaches to it? You prove my point that society constantly tells you to not respect anything feminine–even the proper adjective to describe it. As a man (Gary H.) pointed out on a list I’m on just the other day, "people don’t like to use the word “female” but use “women” as an adjective. Like: “The official agreed that there are many more women attorneys today.” But they don’t say “men attorneys,” they say “male attorneys.”

Food for thought about the impact society is having on our little boys and girls, and unbeknownst to you, on you.

 

[Madaglan]

Originally Quoted by Forest-Pine:

It is only the Catholic Church which teaches a true balance. Equality. Respect. Faith first, family second is an expectation of BOTH spouses and so long as it is kept the church doesn’t bother itself with how. (Mom working, dad home? Vice-versa? Something else? Is Jesus served? Your family? OK!) Yes, wives are to submit to their husbands. The fundies got this part down while the feminists reject it. Also, husbands are supposed to submit to their wives. Just as Christ lived, loved, and died for the Church, so are husbands to do for their wives. The fundies forget this part, or even join the feminists in outright covering it up as it does not fit their agendas of making the Catholic Church out to be evil so that they can set up their own version of the truth.

I perfectly agree with you. And this is where I’m having problems with feminist theory: many radical feminists portray the patriarchal system as being in power and how females should empower themselves in order to assert the respect that they should be given in their theological views and personal faith experiences.

I have no problem with hearing females’ theological views, and I am quite happy to hear their faith experiences; but the whole emphasis on “power” and “authority” seems a bit misguided as the means to these very good ends. Maybe it’s just me, but I try not to think of Christianity in terms of power, authority and oppression/suppression. I suppose that one can see these facts as historical social realities, but I think that when the radical feminists emphasize empowerment and authority, they only add fuel to a situation which raises these two above humility, agapic love, charity–those qualities which I think are more necessary for genuine Catholic communion and justice for those in it. The radical feminists do not claim to assert authority over the patriarchal men who run the system, and I have no doubt that many of them are honest when they say this, but I am just concerned with the emboldened emphasis on “power” and “authority,” which I think leads to a distortion as to what Christianity is all about.

Feel free to disagree or comment