God/Culture/Women

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_Catholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The_Catholic

Guest
Hello all šŸ™‚ I can see right off the bat that certain people may attack this post, so I ask only Catholics to respond, and not Protestant or Atheists.

I was wondering, does God communicate with man as if he were familiar with or living in our culture, speaking to us so we’d understand His message?

I’m not talking about God changing with the times, no, no. Just that, well take slavery. In Biblical times it was a nearly universal thing, God never comes out and opposes it, He never says to either stop or continue with it. But He did give Moses commands on how to treat the slaves, correct?

Likewise St. Paul told women not to adorn themselves in jewlery, or men to have long hair, or women to cover their heads at prayer, etc. Was this God’s influence on Paul, or was Paul simply speaking by means of what was best in those times for that culture to worship? This doesn’t imply God changing with the times, only that people talk, act, and speak differently throughout every culture. And sometimes it seems God speaks to us as if he too were living within that same culture, so we’d best understand I assume, UNLESS of course that culture lives in sin, then it’s a definite NO, NO!! šŸ™‚ Am I making sense?

And how a woman is to be submissive to her husband, while that is a God commanded doctrine, it seemed the majority of the world also held that, until our modern times.

But can it not be noted that many men abused this idea of dominating a woman? I’ve heard many horrific tales and stories that I’m sure can’t all be false of men wrongfully abusing their ā€œheadā€ and hurting their wives, or females in general. A man therefore is to love his wife as Christ loved the Church. Is that not such an incredible love?? And yet why do so many men fall into the habit of ā€œI’M the boss, you are mine! Do what I say and when I say it!ā€ Such attitudes are anti-Christian I’d say.

On the other hand women now-a-days, mostly the feminists, are doing this back to men, slandering us with every name in the book, categorizing all of us as the same, when such is not the case.

Sorry for the confusion, it’s difficult to write what I’m thinking right now. But I hope it’s clear enough for responses, from Catholics only, please.
 
I also want to ask, when it comes to Mother Mary, isn’t SHE over all us men? She’s our Queen right? And closest to Christ right? And we’re supposed to honor and submit to her, right?

Therefore isn’t that something a woman, (who has a hard time submitting to a man) can rejoice in? Especially the fact that it was through a WOMAN (not man) that our Lord came to save us.

It seems many, even ā€˜Catholic’ feminists forget this.
 
Likewise St. Paul told women not to adorn themselves in jewlery, or men to have long hair, or women to cover their heads at prayer, etc. Was this God’s influence on Paul, or was Paul simply speaking by means of what was best in those times for that culture to worship? This doesn’t imply God changing with the times, only that people talk, act, and speak differently throughout every culture. And sometimes it seems God speaks to us as if he too were living within that same culture, so we’d best understand I assume, UNLESS of course that culture lives in sin, then it’s a definite NO, NO!! šŸ™‚ Am I making sense?
Do you doubt that ā€œthe head of every man is Christ: and the head of the woman is the man: and the head of Christ is God?ā€ (1 Corinthians 11). Why would this truth change with the times? Do you not believe that which St. Paul spoke was the truth as revealed to him by God Himself?
And how a woman is to be submissive to her husband, while that is a God commanded doctrine, it seemed the majority of the world also held that, until our modern times.
This is very true.
But can it not be noted that many men abused this idea of dominating a woman? I’ve heard many horrific tales and stories that I’m sure can’t all be false of men wrongfully abusing their ā€œheadā€ and hurting their wives, or females in general. A man therefore is to love his wife as Christ loved the Church. Is that not such an incredible love?? And yet why do so many men fall into the habit of ā€œI’M the boss, you are mine! Do what I say and when I say it!ā€ Such attitudes are anti-Christian I’d say.

On the other hand women now-a-days, mostly the feminists, are doing this back to men, slandering us with every name in the book, categorizing all of us as the same, when such is not the case.
We do this to each other because of the hardness of our hearts not because God somehow failed communicating his Word to us.
 
Scripture is inspired not dictated.

Loving your neighbor as yourself, and marriage are not disconnected ideas.

Abuse is common by both sexes, all abuse is wrong. Men are made to lead woman, woman are made to follow. Leading and following do not require any abuse. God does command men to lead and care for woman yet in the parable of seven husbands we are told this relationship is restricted to earth and not binding in heaven. So it would seem to be an earthly test of men and woman.
 
I attended a seminar about 30 years ago, where the guy doing the preaching, he was not a Catholic, said that this biblical submission of the wife was not so much a form of slavery or unquestioning obedience, but rather that a wife traveled through life under the protection of her husband. His role was like that of an umbrella protecting her from the elements. I thought it made sense considering the scriptural role of the husband.

Also slavery as described in scripture was loads different than the slavery practiced by the Romans and by white folks in the 18th and 19th century which made a human being a chattel like a cow or horse.
 
Sometimes a line or thought will come out of some odd source that helps put things into perspective on such issues. One that made a light go off for me was a line from the movie ā€œTake the Leadā€. It’s about a man teaching inner city high school kids how to ballroom dance. As he is lining up the guys with the gals he talks about the guys taking the lead. One of the gals objects and says isn’t an archaic idea that the man lead. The man replies that it was never the idea that the man had the right to lead like a tyrant, but rather that the woman gave him permission to lead her.

And isn’t that what happens in marriage? When we gals say our vows we are giving the man we are marrying the right to lead us. So, if a man thinks he has some God-given right apart from charity to lead he is wrong and if a woman withholds permission to her husband thinking she still needs to be independent of him she is wrong. Just something that makes sense to me, anyway. šŸ™‚
 
Sometimes a line or thought will come out of some odd source that helps put things into perspective on such issues. One that made a light go off for me was a line from the movie ā€œTake the Leadā€. It’s about a man teaching inner city high school kids how to ballroom dance. As he is lining up the guys with the gals he talks about the guys taking the lead. One of the gals objects and says isn’t an archaic idea that the man lead. The man replies that it was never the idea that the man had the right to lead like a tyrant, but rather that the woman gave him permission to lead her.

And isn’t that what happens in marriage? When we gals say our vows we are giving the man we are marrying the right to lead us. So, if a man thinks he has some God-given right apart from charity to lead he is wrong and if a woman withholds permission to her husband thinking she still needs to be independent of him she is wrong. Just something that makes sense to me, anyway. šŸ™‚
Excellent post Della.
 
I also want to ask, when it comes to Mother Mary, isn’t SHE over all us men? She’s our Queen right? And closest to Christ right? And we’re supposed to honor and submit to her, right?

Therefore isn’t that something a woman, (who has a hard time submitting to a man) can rejoice in? Especially the fact that it was through a WOMAN (not man) that our Lord came to save us.

It seems many, even ā€˜Catholic’ feminists forget this.
The thing to remember that God created men and women
ā€œmale and female created them Heā€

He wants us to be diverse, women are of equal value, but they are not men. Just putting that out there.

Mary became the most perfect image of man ever on earth with the exception of her Son. Mary is the example that all man (corporate sense is used in these occasions) should work towards.

The Catholic Church is probably the best out of the Christian denominations for women’s equality while adhering to the teachings of Christ.

Pax

Conall Cernach
 
Scripture is inspired not dictated.
Yes, it is unchangeable and free from error, too.
Was this God’s influence on Paul, or was Paul simply speaking by means of what was best in those times for that culture to worship?
Today many Catholic women do not wear veils to mass even though the law demanding they do wear them was never abrogated. What makes us think that our modern culture is so dramatically different than the Corinthians’, for example, that some of St. Paul’s written words no longer apply inasmuch as they did for the Corinthians?
 
Yes, it is unchangeable and free from error, too.
Today many Catholic women do not wear veils to mass even though the law demanding they do wear them was never abrogated. What makes us think that our modern culture is so dramatically different than the Corinthians’, for example, that some of St. Paul’s written words no longer apply inasmuch as they did for the Corinthians?
I don’t see the need for a veil, either do it or do not. it seems much more as a cultural issue, not an issue of one’s heart.
 
I don’t see the need for a veil, either do it or do not. it seems much more as a cultural issue, not an issue of one’s heart.
And so it is not a cultural issue today when so many women do not cover themselves appropriately for attending mass? And when men wear shorts and not pants and women wear pants and not dresses?
 
Six months ago I was burned for asking that one of my posts be responded to by only a particular group of posters who might have the insight I was seeking.

Bad idea. Understand that this is a public forum and anyone can post any idea, unless it does not meet certain guidelines which can be found in Forum Rules.

I will never again use a man as my ā€œumbrellaā€. If I get wet, that’s my problem. Not every woman is meant to follow a man. The whole idea nauseates me. I prefer living at poverty level rather than having the two income ā€œtrade-offā€ (nice house, vacations, possibly kids in private schools). I make my own decisions, I have my own money, I drive and maintain my own car which I paid for with my own cash. I will not succumb to allowing a ā€œhusbandā€ to make tacit demands on my time, my resources or my body.

Gag.

marietta
 
marietta;4230918]
I will never again use a man as my ā€œumbrellaā€. If I get wet, that’s my problem. Not every woman is meant to follow a man. The whole idea nauseates me. I prefer living at poverty level rather than having the two income ā€œtrade-offā€ (nice house, vacations, possibly kids in private schools). I make my own decisions, I have my own money, I drive and maintain my own car which I paid for with my own cash. I will not succumb to allowing a ā€œhusbandā€ to make tacit demands on my time, my resources or my body.
I don’t think you would ever have to worry about that ever happening again.
 
neat62:

We have a difference of opinion. I don’t find that problematic; do you?

marietta
 
Six months ago I was burned for asking that one of my posts be responded to by only a particular group of posters who might have the insight I was seeking.

Bad idea. Understand that this is a public forum and anyone can post any idea, unless it does not meet certain guidelines which can be found in Forum Rules.

I will never again use a man as my ā€œumbrellaā€. If I get wet, that’s my problem. Not every woman is meant to follow a man. The whole idea nauseates me. I prefer living at poverty level rather than having the two income ā€œtrade-offā€ (nice house, vacations, possibly kids in private schools). I make my own decisions, I have my own money, I drive and maintain my own car which I paid for with my own cash. I will not succumb to allowing a ā€œhusbandā€ to make tacit demands on my time, my resources or my body.

Gag.

marietta
I used to hold to these ideas, too. There were two reasons I did (not saying this applies to you, but I wouldn’t be surprised): Firstly, I held a grudge against the male sex for being ā€œdominantā€ in the culture/history. For a while I was really tempted to accept the feminist take on it but then I asked myself a few questions that had been obscured by all the rhetoric. Why have men been the ones who have appeared to have been the movers and shakers throughout history? Was it because of male domination as much as it was because women by nature just aren’t as interested in ruling the world when they are happy ruling hearts instead? Women can use their brains as much as men, but they don’t have to be the CEO/president/emperor in order to direct events. It’s all right if they do, but it’s not the end all and be all of life, as some would have us believe.

And secondly I asked myself what then is the true relationship between men and women, husband and wife, and why have people sorted themselves out into families down through the centuries in nearly every culture in the world? Because it’s natural that they do.

Women aren’t giving up anything by blending their lives with men in marriage. Money is only a means to an end–to make life possible and to have a few comforts. It’s not really important who pays the bills as long as they get paid. Love and trust aren’t dirty words, you know. šŸ˜‰ They’re what make life with others possible. It is selfishness that makes for war and hurt and loneliness not submission to the desires of another out of love and respect.

Trust me, I had to learn these things the hard way. But they are true, hard or not, dear fellow woman.
 
I’m male, but this is interesting to me! I’m assuming women are going to open up this thread more.

I hardly ever think of the ā€œheadā€ role in my marriage. I’m not bossing anybody around, myself included.

I don’t know if this is good or bad. Probably, from the female side, depends on how suspicious you are of men. From the male side, who knows? And there may be both men and women who say I’m slacking here.
 
I’m male, but this is interesting to me! I’m assuming women are going to open up this thread more.

I hardly ever think of the ā€œheadā€ role in my marriage. I’m not bossing anybody around, myself included.

I don’t know if this is good or bad. Probably, from the female side, depends on how suspicious you are of men. From the male side, who knows? And there may be both men and women who say I’m slacking here.
You sound fine to me! In my household we both ā€œbossā€ each other around depending on what needs doing and who is the more likely to need ā€œencouragementā€ to do it. It’s definitely a two-way street. A husband has authority but he’s a fool if he lets that go to his head. And a woman has influence but is a fool if she turns into a nag. There are pitfalls for both, I think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top